a i i * ^<-> 



,* v . 











''- ***** < : 




9 » J • • 



• ■ o - «^ 

v 



«^°^ 'UBS?" * V *V °WM? : ^ 



* v »' 




1 r v»<<> • 






vv 



■ s \--?*K-'y% % ^ws /\ -JW-' ** v \ ; .w /% 








■-. \. ,0* ,^-. *» **,£&%, A$&\ <S^S '" 



**. ^.q* °' 




*bV 







^^ 












&°' 




.So™-** <? - %*^ ^ v^^> %'tt\& \:*?z* % <>- <> --• 

O > 






V 0° 



o **^T* A 




> 



V ^ 



«5 ^ 














\ 



1 s s *^L% *> 






/% 








***** 






^0* 












„4 o» 
> % ..-'.•.'"■^ r 0* t -% ^o . A 






*b^' :£0^Za** '+*£ ^ 







5> >L!oL'* *> 



* 4. v 












♦* 0° ^ 







♦ <^^w < \ o j* 






j ^9- 






<* 




v-s 1 





■A -i- 




w v 















o^ ...,'V i ' , " o0 \<^ \ tt - , %°° %'^?T'\fr \^^\<? 

\:W% ! S% '"• /\ -Sk-* ^ % « *-w- : #*% 

^ 5 .., ^ °"° .V^ % "" $ % *^° ^ °^ ^^ .0° ^ 














^°^ 






-:. 



















* ^-' 







-t 40 -" 






• A ^ 











,0 



r ^ 



IC 9086 



Bureau of Mines Information Circular/1986 



Tin Availability — Market 
Economy Countries 

A Minerals Availability Appraisal 

By D. I. Bleiwas, Andrew E. Sabin, and G. R. Peterson 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 



Information Circular 9086 



Tin Availability — Market 
Economy Countries 

A Minerals Availability Appraisal 

By D. I. Bleiwas, Andrew E. Sabin, and G. R. Peterson 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
Donald Paul Hodel, Secretary 

BUREAU OF MINES 
Robert C. Horton, Director 



As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has 
responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This 
includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and 
wildlife, preserving the environment and cultural values of our national parks and 
historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The 
Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their 
development is in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major 
responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in 
island territories under U.S. administration. 



tkI^s 




no 



Ao^ 



Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data 



Bleiwas, Donald I. 

Tin availability — market economy countries. 

(Bureau of Mines information circular; 9086' 

Bibliography: p. 4 7 

Supt. of Docs, no.: I 28.27: 9086 

1. Tin industry. 2. Tin mines and mining. I. Sabin. Andrew E. II. Peterson. Gary 
R., 1948- III. Title. IV. Series: Information circular (United States. Bureau of 

Mines); 9086. 



TN295.U4 [HD9539.T51 622 s 1338.274531 86-600002 



PREFACE 



The Bureau of Mines is assessing the worldwide availability of selected minerals 
of economic significance, most of which are also critical minerals. The Bureau iden- 
tifies, collects, compiles, and evaluates information on producing, developing, and ex- 
plored deposits, and on mineral processing plants worldwide. Objectives are to classify 
both domestic and foreign resources, to identify by cost evaluation those demonstrated 
resources that are reserves, and to prepare analyses of mineral availability. 

This report is one of a continuing series of reports that analyze the availability of 
minerals from domestic and foreign sources. Questions about, or comments on, these 
reports should be addressed to Chief, Division of Minerals Availability, Bureau of Mines, 
2401 E St., NW., Washington, DC 20241. 



IV 



UNIT OF MEASURE ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT 



°c 


degree Celsius 


cm 


centimeter 


d/yr 


day per year 


kg 


kilogram 


km 


kilometer 


km 2 


square kilometer 


kV'A 


kilovolt ampere 


lb 


pound 


m 


meter 


m 3 /yr 


cubic meter per year 



tr oz/mt 


troy ounce per metric ton 


pet 


percent 


mt 


metric ton 


mt/d 


metric ton per day 


mt/yr 


metric ton per year 


tr oz 


troy ounce 


yr 


year 


$/lb 


dollar per pound 


$/mt 


dollar per metric ton 



CONTENTS 



Preface iii 

Abstract 1 

Introduction 2 

Methodology 2 

U.S. perspective 4 

Commodity overview 5 

Tinplate 5 

Solder 5 

Tin chemicals 5 

Secondary tin 5 

World production of tin concentrates 6 

Malaysia 6 

Indonesia 6 

Bolivia 6 

Thailand 7 

Brazil 7 

Other countries 7 

World production of tin metal 8 

Malaysia 8 

Indonesia 8 

Thailand 8 

Bolivia 9 

Brazil 9 

United Kingdom 9 

Centrally planned economy countries 9 

The International Tin Council 9 

History 9 

Organizational breakdown 10 

Objectives 10 

Formation of the Association of Tin Producing 

Countries 11 

Smuggling 11 

Geology and resources 12 

Southeast Asia 17 

Malaysia 17 

Indonesia 17 

Thailand 17 

Burma 19 

Other Pacific countries ' 19 

Australia 19 

Japan 19 

South America 20 

Bolivia 20 

Brazil 20 

Argentina 20 

Peru 20 



Page 

Africa 20 

Republic of South Africa 20 

Zaire 21 

Nigeria 21 

Zimbabwe 21 

Namibia 21 

Europe: United Kingdom 21 

North America 21 

Canada 21 

United States 22 

Mine and beneficiation technology 22 

Gravel pumps 22 

Dredging 24 

Tin shed 24 

Mining of lode deposits 24 

Fuming, smelting, and refining 27 

Fuming of concentrates 27 

Smelting 27 

Refining 29 

Pyrometallurgy 29 

Electrolytic refining 29 

Byproducts of tin smelting and refining 29 

Operating and capital costs 30 

Operating costs 30 

Costs aggregated by producing and 

undeveloped deposits and regions 30 

Costs aggregated by mining method 32 

Gravel pumps 32 

Dredges 32 

Underground mines 33 

Open pit mines 35 

Summary 35 

Capital costs 35 

Tin availability 36 

Total availability 37 

Annual availability 41 

Producing mines and regions 41 

Undeveloped deposits 43 

Availability of tin by mining method 45 

Conclusions 46 

References 47 

Appendix A. — Deposits investigated but not 

included in evaluation 48 

Appendix B. — World tin smelters and refiners .... 48 



ILLUSTRATIONS 

Page 

1. Classification of mineral resources 3 

2. Primary sources of U.S. tin imports 4 

3. Estimated tin-in-concentrate production among primary MEC producers 7 

4. Distribution of tin metal production among primary MEC producers 8 

5. Distribution of in situ recoverable tin among evaluated countries 13 

6. Locations of evaluated tin deposits and regions 13 

7. Tin-bearing areas in Southeast Asia 18 

8. Tin-bearing areas and major smelter complexes in Malaysia 19 

9. Distribution of recoverable tin in MEC's by mining method 22 

10. Typical gravel pump operation 23 

11. Typical bucket-line dredge and outboard concentrating plant 25 

12. Flowsheets for typical simple and complex tin shed plants 26 



VI 

ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued 

Page 

13. Typical smelter flowsheets for low-, medium-, and high-grade tin concentrates 28 

14. Distribution of potentially recoverable tin from producing and undeveloped mines and regions in MEC's, 

by country 37 

15. Total recoverable tin from producing mines and undeveloped deposits in all evaluated countries and in 
Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand at both a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR 38 

16. Comparison of total recoverable tin from producing mines and undeveloped deposits in MEC's at both a 0- 

and 15-pct DCFROR 39 

17. Annual availability of tin from producing mines and regions in MEC's at various cost levels including a 

0-pct DCFROR 42 

18. Annual availability of tin from producing mines and regions in MEC's at various cost levels including a 

15-pct DCFROR 42 

19. Potential annual availability of tin from undeveloped deposits in MEC's at various cost levels including a 

0-pct DCFROR 44 

20. Potential annual availability of tin from undeveloped deposits in MEC's at various cost levels including a 
15-pct DCFROR 44 

21. Percentage share of potentially recoverable tin from producing and undeveloped mines, deposits, and 

regions in MEC's, by mining method 45 



TABLES 

1. Tin byproducts commodity prices used in economic evaluations 3 

2. Tin market prices, 1975-84 3 

3. Production of tinplate in selected MEC's 1980-83 5 

4. Production of tin concentrate in selected MEC's, 1980-84 6 

5. Production of tin metal in selected MEC's 1980-83 9 

6. Membership and vote distribution of Sixth International Tin Agreement 10 

7. Tin resources by country 12 

8. Market economy country tin deposit's, general information 14 

9. Varieties of tin minerals 17 

10. Estimated average feed grade and mining and beneficiation costs for producing and undeveloped deposits . 30 

11. Estimated operating costs and byproduct credits for producing and undeveloped deposits 31 

12. Estimated capacities, feed grade, and mining and beneficiation costs for producing mines, by mining 

method 33 

13. Estimated production costs and byproduct credits for producing mines, by mining method 34 

14. Capital investments for a hypothetical 540, 000-mt/yr- tin-ore gravel pump operation 36 

15. Capital investments for underground mines 36 

16. Comparison of estimated long-run average total costs of potential tin from producing mines and 
undeveloped deposits at a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR in January 1984 U.S. dollars 40 

17. Comparison of estimated long-run average total costs of potential tin production from producing mines 

and undeveloped deposits at a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR in January 1982 U.S. dollars 40 

18. Estimated potential 1984 production capacities for producing mines, with costs derived at a 0-pct 

DCFROR 40 

19. Estimated potential 1984 production capacities for producing mines, with costs derived at a 15-pct 

DCFROR 43 

20. Estimated potential 1995 production capacities for producing mines, with costs derived at a 0-pct 

DCFROR 43 

21. Estimated potential 1995 production capacities for producing mines, with costs derived at a 15-pct 

DCFROR 43 

22. Estimated potential production capacities from undeveloped deposits in year N + 5, with costs derived at a 
0-pct DCFROR 45 

23. Estimated potential production capacities from undeveloped deposits in year N + 5, with costs derived at a 
15-pct DCFROR 45 

24. Estimated potential production capacities from undeveloped deposits in year N + 10, with costs derived at 

a 0-pct DCFROR 45 

25. Estimated potential production capacities from undeveloped deposits in year N + 10, with costs derived at 

a 15-pct DCFROR 45 

26. Potentially recoverable tin from producing mines and estimated total cost at a 0-pct DCFROR, by mining 
method 46 

B-l. Pertinent 1982 data for world primary tin smelters and/or refineries 49 



TIN AVAILABILITY— MARKET ECONOMY COUNTRIES 
A Minerals Availability Appraisal 

By D. I. Bleiwas, 1 Andrew E. Sabin, 2 and G. R. Peterson 3 
ABSTRACT 



The Bureau of Mines determined demonstrated tin resources and costs associated 
with tin production in order to evaluate the potential for tin production from 18 
market economy countries (MEC's). Data were collected from tin producers, in most 
cases during on-site visits. The analyses evaluated the relative economic and resource 
position of 146 mines, deposits, or regions in January 1984 dollars. The demonstrated 
resource of recoverable tin within the nations studied is approximately 2.8 million 
metric tons (mt). Of this total, over 73 pet is recoverable from the Southeast Asian 
countries of Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia, which in 1983 accounted for almost 60 
pet of the world's tin production. Brazil has joined the Southeast Asian countries as a 
major low-cost, high-volume supplier of tin and is likely to continue to expand its 
production. 

Given the 1984 market structure, over 60 pet of the tin in demonstrated resources 
was economically recoverable. Historically, the International Tin Council (ITC) has 
helped maintain relatively stable tin prices through a buffer stock and sales quotas. In 
late 1985, exhaustion of buffer stock funds led to suspension of tin trading on the world's 
major tin metal exchanges. 



'Physical scientist. 

2 Geologist. 

3 Mineral economist. 

Minerals Availability Field Office, Bureau of Mines, Denver, CO. 



INTRODUCTION 



The purpose of this Bureau of Mines report is to 
identify and define demonstrated tin resources and 
evaluate the potential production from 1 domestic and 145 
foreign deposits, mines, and regions in 17 foreign 
countries and the United States. The objectives was to 
evaluate at least 85 pet of the tin resources and 85 pet of 
the tin production from producing operations in MEC's. 4 
Tin is unlike most other commodities in that large 
amounts are produced, on a cumulative basis, from 
state-owned enterprises (in major tin-producing coun- 
tries), small family groups, communes, and individuals. 
Where data on individual resources and associated costs 
were unavailable, as in the case of gravel pumps, entire 
states or regions were evaluated. Malaysian tin resources, 
in particular, were evaluated in this manner. Mines and 
deposits were evaluated according to their January 1982 
status, with regard to mining and milling methods, 
ownership, costs, and resources. 

This study included identification of tin resources and 
the engineering and economic parameters that affect 
production from the deposits selected for evaluation. 



Information on the 147 foreign mines and regions was 
gathered by the Davy McKee Corp. under Bureau contract 
J0225004 (1 ). 5 Demonstrated and, in some cases, identified 
resources and grades were defined. Also obtained or 
estimated were capital investment and operating costs 
(direct and indirect) and transportation costs to postmill 
processing destinations. Data for the one potential 
domestic operation were collected and evaluated by the 
Bureau of Mines Field Operations Center in Anchorage, 
AK. The overall data and economic evaluation analyses 
were performed by the Bureau's Minerals Availability 
Field Office, Denver, CO. 

Of the 161 tin mines and regions initially investi- 
gated, 2 were excluded because of exhaustion of the 
demonstrated resource, 3 were excluded because their 
resource tonnage was estimated only at the inferred level, 
8 were excluded because tin was actually a minor 
byproduct, 1 was excluded due to a lack of available data, 
and 1 was excluded because the resource was small and 
costs were exceedingly high. The excluded deposits are 
listed in appendix A. 



METHODOLOGY 



The Minerals Availability Program is developing a 
continuously expanding data base for the analysis of 
mineral resource availability. An intregral part of this 
program is the Supply Analysis Model (SAM) developed 
by the Bureau of Mines Minerals Availability Field Office. 
SAM is an interactive computer system that is an effective 
tool for analyzing the economic availability of world 
mineral resources. 

The geologic occurrence particular to the tin opera- 
tions included in this study were determined in order to 
develop estimates of the demonstrated resources (fig. 1), in 
situ grades, and production costs. For each operation 
evaluated, actual or estimated capital expenditures for 
exploration, acquisition, development, and mine and mill 
plant and equipment were included. The capital costs for 
the mining and processing facilities included expenditures 
for mobile and stationary equipment, construction, en- 
gineering, infrastructure, and working capital. Infrastruc- 
ture is a broad category that includes cost for access to the 
mine and its associated facilities, ports, water supply and 
treatment, power supply, and personnel accommodations. 
Working capital is a revolving cash fund for operating 
expenses such as labor, supplies, insurance, and taxes. All 
costs given are in terms of January 1984 U.S. dollars 
(except in a few cases where 1982 U.S. dollars are 
specified). 

The initial capital costs for producing mines and 
developed deposits were depreciated according to the 
actual investment year, and the undepreciated portion 
was treated as a remaining capital investment in 1984. 
Reinvestments varied according to capacity, production 
life, age of facilities, and company philosophy. All costs 
were originally in January 1982 dollars but have been 



updated to January 1984 dollars (except as noted above) 
according to local currency factors and individual country 
inflation indexes. All costs were also weighted prop- 
ortionately according to the effect of labor, energy, and 
capital in the tin industry on a countrywide basis. 

The total operating cost estimated for a given mining 
operation is a combination of direct and indirect costs. 
Direct operating costs include mining and maintenance, 
labor and supplies, supervision, payroll overhead, insur- 
ance, local taxation, and utilities. Indirect operating costs 
include technical and clerical labor, administrative costs, 
maintenance of facilities, and research. Other costs used 
in the analyses included standard deductibles such as 
depreciation, depletion, deferred expenses, investment tax 
credits, and tax-loss carryforwards. 

After the engineering parameters and associated 
costs for the evaluated tin deposits were established, the 
SAM system was used to perform economic evaluations 
pertaining to the availability of tin. The SAM system, a 
comprehensive economic evaluation simulator, was used 
in this study to determine the average total cost of tin 
production over the estimated life of each operation, 
including a prespecified discounted-cash-flow rate of 
return (DCFROR) on investments, less all byproduct 
revenues. This average total cost represents the constant- 
dollar, long-run price at which the primary commodity 
must be sold to recapture all costs of tin production, 
including the prespecified DCFROR. 

For this study, DCFROR's of and 15 pet were 
specified for determining the long-run cost of production 
over the life of a property. The first rate, pet, was used to 
determine the break-even cost, the cost at which revenues 
are sufficient to cover total investment and production 



4 MEC's are defined as all countries that are not considered centrally 
planned economy countries. Centrally planned economy countries are 
Albania, Bulgaria, China, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic 
Republic, Hungary, Kampuchea, Laos, Mongolia, North Korea, Poland, 
Romania, U.S.S.R., and Vietnam. 



5 Italic numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of references 
preceding appendix A. 



Cumulative 
production 



IDENTIFIED RESOURCES 




Inferred 



UNDISCOVERED RESOURCES 



Hypothetical 



Probability range 
(or) 



Speculative 



ECONOMIC 



MARGINALLY 
ECONOMIC 



Inferred 



reserve 



base 



+ 



+ 



SUB- 
ECONOMIC 



Other 
occurrences 



Includes nonconventional and low-grade materials 



Figure 1. — Classification of mineral resources (as developed by the Bureau of Mines and the U.S. Geological Survey). 



Table 1. — Tin byproduct commodity prices 1 used in economic 
evaluations 



Price, per lb 

unless otherwise 

specified 1 



$2.31 
.70 

171.00 

125.00 

370.89 

.25 

12.40 

29.50 

4.99 

3.39 

.49 



Commodity 

Bismuth 

Copper 

Fluorspar, per mt: 

Acid grade 

Metallurgical grade 

Gold per tr oz 

Lead 

Silver per tr oz 

Tantalum oxide 

Tungsten (W0 3 ): 

Ammonium paratungstate (APT) 

Scheelite, artificial or concentrate 

Zinc 

1 Jan. 1984 U.S. dollars. 



Table 2. — Tin market prices, 1975-84, U.S. dollars per pound 1 

Weighted 
Year Lowest Highest average 

1975 abl 3~78 3A0 

1976 3.09 4.31 3.75 

1977 4.30 6.49 5.33 

1978 4.87 7.64 5.89 

1979 , 6.21 7.92 7.07 

1980 6.87 8.99 7.86 

1981 5.97 7.67 6.80 

1982 5.84 7.53 6.20 

1983 5.91 6.55 6.23 

1984 e 5.92 6.03 5.96 

8 Estimate based on projected trends. 

1 Based on New York prices (actual dollars) as reported by the ITC; Penang 
(Malaysia) prices may have been slightly different. 

costs over the operation's life but provide no positive rate 
of return. This rate could reflect commitment to a project 
which seeks only a market share or other advantages such 
as social benefits, foreign capital, technological progress, 
or an expectation of better market prices that would offset 



current unprofitability. A 0-pct DCFROR could be 
acceptable for government-operated mining ventures. For 
privately owned enterprises, a more reasonable economic 
decision-making parameter is that represented by the 
15-pct DCFROR. This rate is considered the minimum 
rate of return sufficient to maintain adequate long-term 
profitability and attract new capital to the industry. 

The SAM program contains a separate tax records file 
for each country and State and includes all the relevant 
tax parameters under which mining firms operate. These 
tax parameters are applied to each evaluated mine, based 
on the assumption that each operation represents a 
separate corporate entity. The SAM system also contains 
a separate file of 12 economic indexes for each country to 
enable updating of cost estimates for both producing and 
nonproducing mines and undeveloped deposits in 95 
countries. 

Prices tables are maintained for all coproducts and 
byproducts that are applicable to the availability analy- 
ses. The byproduct prices used in this study are shown in 
table 1 and tin prices from 1975 to 1984 are listed in table 
2. Stiff tin price control measures were maintained through 
most of 1985. In October, the exhaustion of price- 
controlling funds led to the suspension of all tin trading on 
the London Metal Exchange and the Kuala Lumpur 
market. 

Detailed cash-flow analyses were generated with the 
SAM system for each preproduction and production year 
of an operation beginning with 1984, the initial year of 
analysis. Individual deposit or region analyses were 
aggregated to produce a total availability curve. 

Availability curves are constructed as aggregations of 
all evaluated operations, ordered from those having the 
lowest average total costs to those having the highest. The 
potential availability of tin can be seen by comparing an 
expected long-run constant-dollar market price to the 



average total cost values shown on the availability curves. 
Availability curves are explained in greater detail in the 
"Tin Availability" section. 

Certain assumptions are inherent to all analyses 
presented in this report. It was assumed that — 

1. All mines could (and did) produce at design 
capacity throughout the estimated life of the operation, 
unless they were known to be producing at reduced levels 
or were temporarily shutdown because of depressed 
market conditions. (Full capacity could be resumed after a 
1- to 4-year preproduction period.) 

2. Each operation was able to sell all of its output at 
no less than the determined total cost required to obtain at 
least the minimum specified DCFROR. 



3. Each operation was able to sell its coproducts and 
byproducts at the January 1984 market prices. Preproduc- 
tion development of undeveloped deposits began in a 
hypothetical base year "N." Unless specified data were 
available, time delays relating to permits, environmental 
impact statements, and other factors affecting actual or 
potential production were minimized. 

Some of the deposits evaluated could unexpectedly be 
prevented from development, forced to reduce production, 
or forced to close owing to lack of capital, environmental 
problems or issues, political reasons, a poor economic 
climate, or other constraints not known at the time of the 
evaluations. 



U.S. PERSPECTIVE 



In general, U.S. import reliance for tin is about 75 pet. 
About 25 pet of total U.S. tin requirements is derived from 
recycled scrap, solder, brass and bronze, and secondary 
tin-bearing materials. Total domestic tin production, from 
a placer operation in Alaska and as a byproduct from the 
Climax molybdenum mine in Colorado, amounts to less 
than 100 mt/yr. This is less than 0.2 pet of total annual 
domestic consumption. The one evaluated domestic tin 
resource, Alaska's Lost River deposit (a potential 
hard-rock open pit mine), is relatively small and probably 
would not be competitive at current or projected tin 
market prices. The Lost River placer mine, near Tin City, 
AK, is a very small producer and was not evaluated owing 
to very small demonstrated resources and its low 
historical production. 

The major foreign suppliers of tin to the United States 
(fig. 2) are Malaysia, Thailand, Bolivia, and Indonesia. 
During the period 1979-82, Malaysia and Thailand 
supplied more than half of all U.S. tin imports (2). Since 
that time, Malaysia has lost part of its market share to 
Bolivia, Brazil, and Thailand. 

In order to maintain a guaranteed supply of tin to the 
United States during a war emergency, the General 
Services Administration (GSA) maintains a stockpile. The 




tin stockpile has the highest monetary value of any of the 
61 listed stockpile commodities, exceeding $2 billion (3). 
The GSA stockpile is the world's single largest readily 
available supply of tin metal. As of March 31, 1984, the 
stockpile contained 190,354 mt tin (3). This is down from a 
peak of 346,472 mt between 1946 and 1955. The current 
stockpile is sufficient to satisfy world market economy tin 
metal consumption for 1 yr. Sales from the stockpile were 
started in 1962 and have continued intermittently. In 
1983, approximately 2,865 mt was sold. The Defenses 
Authorization Bill, approved in 1982, allowed GSA to sell 
up to 25,400 mt of tin in fiscal year 1985, although annual 
sales exceeding 3,000 mt were unlikely through 1986. The 
Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) 
memorandum of understanding limited annual sales of tin 
from the stockpile to 3,000 mt/yr for 1983 and 1984 and 
continued into 1985. There are claims, especially by the 
ITC, that GSA sales produce significant downward 
pressure on the price of tin; however, GSA's tin sales 
continue. Owing to the availability of tin through the open 
market and the current size of the U.S. stockpile, the 
position of the United States in relation to its immediate 
need for tin is relatively secure. 




1975-78 overage 1979-82 average 

Total = 206,700 mt Total = I 75,700 mt 

Figure 2. — Primary sources of U.S. tin imports, 1975-78 and 1979-82. 



COMMODITY OVERVIEW 



Tin was first used approximately 5,000 yr ago as a 
hardening agent with copper to form bronze. Since that 
time, tin has become critical to industry as a plating agent 
because of its ability to protect steel from corrosion and as 
a component of solder because of its superior adhering 
properties. Other minor uses for tin include the manufac- 
ture of chemicals, pewter, bronze, brass, and alloys for 
bearings. Research in a new application, as a component 
in maintenance-free batteries, is ongoing. Market eco- 
nomy tin consumption fell to a 23-yr low in 1982, at just 
over 157,000 mt, and only rose to about 160,000 mt in 
1983. Consumption was expected to increase to 165,000 
mt in 1984 (4). 



Table 3. — Production of tinplate in selected MEC's, 1980-83, 
thousand metric tons (5) 

Country 1980 1981 1982 1981 

United States 3,699.9 3,273.6 2,714.0 2,568.7 

Japan 1,868.8 1,665.8 1,639.1 1,584.8 

United Kingdom 597.1 876.2 887.3 882 1 

France 914.2 782.0 847.2 771 ,3 

Germany, Federal Republic of 962.5 843.1 818.6 722.3 

Netherlands 504.5 513.4 516.6 524.0 

Italy 436.1 374.1 413.2 485.4 

Spain 389 6 414.2 452 432 

Brazil 594.6 403.2 447.9 391 ,0 

Canada 491 .8 365.9 394.7 382.4 

Australia 360.0 339.5 330.0 338.0 

Belgium 333.5 325.4 276.2 303,3 

Others 1,841.4 2,072.9 2,022.1 1,828.7 

Total 12,994.0 12,249.3 11,758.9 11.214.0 



TINPLATE 

Tinplate has traditionally been the largest single use 
of tin, accounting for approximately 54,000 mt, or 35 to 40 
pet of all tin produced. Nearly 90 pet of the tin used for 
tinplate is used in the packaging industry, for cans and 
other containers, while most of the remainder is used for 
the manufacture of gaskets, oil and air filters, and 
automotive trim (5). 

Although there are some variations in the manufac- 
ture of tinplate, the general process requires passing an 
electric current through fiat-rolled strip steel to produce a 
cathode. The electrically charged steel is then passed 
through tin electrolyte and run at high speed between 
suspended tin anodes. An electrochemical reaction leaves 
a thin coating of tin deposited on both sides of the steel as 
tinplate. 

Approximately 12 lb (5.4 kg) of tin is required for every 
metric ton of tinplate produced. Table 3 lists the 
production of tinplate in selected countries for 1980-83. 
The United States is the largest producer in the world. 
Three major U.S. companies produce tinplate: U.S. Steel 
Corp., Bethlehem Steel, and Weirton Steel Co. Owing to 
the recession and substitution of the early 1980's of 
aluminum and tin-free steel for tinplate, the 1983 U.S. 
tinplate industry operated at about 50 pet of capacity. 
Production increased in 1984. 

Technological progress has allowed a progressive 
reduction in tin coating weights, which has enabled the 
tinplate industry to remain competitive with aluminum 
and plastics as a packaging material. Although there have 
been a series of reductions in production and permanent 
closures in the domestic tinplate industry, a new 
technologically advanced tinplate plant with an annual 
capacity of 2.9 million mt (of tinplate steel) was being 
planned by Bethlehem Steel and could be on-line in 1986. 

Japan is the world's largest exporter of tinplate and 
the second largest producer. Japanese tinplate manufac- 
turers produce a somewhat greater tin thickness than 
producers in other countries, owing to the requirements 
for the types of foods canned, such as fish, tomatoes, and 
fruits. In 1982, approximately 190,000 mt, or about 70 pet 
of China's tinplate needs, was supplied by Japan (5). 

The European Economic Community (the United 
Kingdom, France, Federal Republic of Germany, the 
Netherlands, Italy, and Belgium) as a group is the largest 
producer of tinplate in the world. Of these countries, the 
United Kingdom is the single largest producer, and 
France is the largest exporter. 



Five Asian countries, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philip- 
pines, Thailand, and Singapore, have a combined installed 
annual capacity of about 365,000 mt of tinplate (5). Future 
plans for self-reliance include a 130,000-mt/yr plant in 
Indonesia due to start full operation in 1986 and a 
250,000-mt/yr plant in Malaysia. Both plants will come 
on-line by 1986. In 1983, however, the five-country region 
consumed approximately 600,000 mt of tinplate. Despite 
producing well over half of the MEC's tin, the region is 
still a net importer of tinplate, but this is expected to 
change in the near future. 

SOLDER 

The most widely used alloy of tin is soft solder, which 
is generally composed of tin and lead in various 
proportions. In 1982, approximately 49,000 mt, or about 
20 pet of all tin consumed, was used as tin in solders. The 
electronics industry is the largest consumer of solder. 
Solders have an average tin content of 60 pet, although 
some specialty solders contain up to 97 pet Sn. Owing to 
the growth of the electronics industry, moderate growth in 
demand for solder is expected through 1987. The 
application of new alunimum soldering techniques could 
also result in increased consumption. Solders are also used 
for nonelectric applications such as radiator repair, 
plumbing, car bodies, and sheet metal. Most of the solders 
for engineering contain from 2 to 50 pet Sn and use a 
significant amount of impure and recycled tin (5). 

TIN CHEMICALS 

Tin chemicals account for about 10 pet of total tin 
consumption. The use of tin in chemicals is expected to 
continue growing through 1987 (5). 

Tin is used in plastics, specifically polyvinyl chloride 
(PVC), to reduce susceptibility to corrosion, light, and 
heat. Tin is also used in nontoxic biocides, such as 
pesticides and ship paints. Tin has wide applications as a 
pigment in glass and ceramics and as a corrosion-resistant 
additive for primer paints. 



SECONDARY TIN 

The United States is the world's largest producer of 
secondary tin. In 1983, about 25 pet of the total tin 



consumed in the United States originated from secondary 
material. 

There are three primary sources of secondary tin: (1) 
refined tin from scrap, tinplate scrap, and residues from 
tinplating, tinning, and detinning; (2) tin contained in 
alloys; and (3) tin contained in scrap originating from tin 
fabricators and manufacturers of tin-containing products. 

These secondary sources consist of basically two 
types: tin scrap and tinplate scrap. Tin scrap originates as 
tin in tin products and tin-rich alloys (bronze, brass, etc.) 



Tinplate scrap consists of tinplated rejects and leftover 
trimmings from the manufacture of tinplated containers. 
It is difficult to acquire accurate statistics regarding the 
amount of tin derived from secondary sources worldwide 
because some tin alloys are simply melted and poured to 
produce new alloy castings. It is possible that between 10 
and 20 pet of total world tin production originates from tin 
scrap. Secondary tin production may increase if tin and 
steel prices rise or if growing environmental concerns 
result in more recycling of containers. 



WORLD PRODUCTION OF TIN CONCENTRATES 



As shown in table 4 and figure 3, production of tin 
concentrate is dominated by four countries: Malaysia, 
Indonesia, Bolivia, and Thailand. These four countries 
accounted for about two-thirds of the 1983 MEC produc- 
tion and, based on preliminary estimates, slightly less 
than two-thirds of the 1984 MEC production. In 1980, 
these four countries accounted for over 80 pet of all 
tin-in-concentrate production. The decrease in market 
share from 1980 to 1983 resulted primarily from export 
controls and production cutbacks among members of the 
ITC, of which three of the four countries are members 
(Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia). The other members, 
Austrailia, Nigeria, and Zaire, produced only 17 pet of 
MEC tin-in-concentrate production. Voluntary production 
and export controls among the six ITC member countries 
effectively reduced 1983 tin-in-concentrate production by 
about 55,000 mt. Although there is some variation, most 
tin concentrates average about 70 pet Sn. A brief 
discussion of tin concentrate production, by country, 
follows: 



MALAYSIA 

In 1984, Malaysia produced over 40,000 mt of 
tin-in-concentrate. It has continually been the world's 
largest producer of tin since the last century. In 1900, 
Malaysia produced about 43,000 mt tin-in-concentrate, or 
about 55 pet of world production (7). Although Malaysia's 
tin industry was greatly affected during the Second World 
War by the Japanese invasion, it rapidly recovered its 
position after the war. 

The tin mining industry is becoming increasingly 
Government controlled under the name of the Malaysian 
Mining Corporation (MMC). MMC has many subsidiaries 
responsible for individual or regional mining operations 
and, in recent years, has produced over 35 pet of the 
country's total tin production. There is little foreign 
participation in the Malaysian tin industry. In 1984 and 
1985, production in Malaysia was more than 30 pet below 
plant capacity owing to voluntary export controls agreed 
upon by members of the ITC. 

Malaysia's production is primarily from dredges and 
gravel pumps. Mining operations are discussed more fully 
later in this report. 



INDONESIA 

In 1983, Indonesia produced 26,554 mt tin-in- 
concentrate. Mining activities are situated on or around 



Table 4. — Production of tin concentrate in selected MEC's 

1980-84, metric tons (5-6) 

Country 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984" 

Malaysia 61,404 59,938 52,342 41,367 38,000 

Indonesia 32,527 35,268 33,800 26,554 25,000 

Bolivia 27,271 29,830 26,773 24,736 24,000 

Thailand 33,685 31 ,474 26,207 1 9,942 20,000 

Brazil 6,900 8,300 8,200 13,700 17,700 

Australia 11,588 12,925 12,615 9,578 9,000 

United Kingdom 3,000 3,900 4,200 4,100 e 4,000 

South Africa, Republic of . . 2,913 2,811 3,035 2,668 e 2,301 

Nigeria 2,569 2,300 1,708 1,450 1,340 

Zaire 3,159 3,321 3,144 2,930 4,120 

Unspecified origin 7,000 6,000 10,000 16.600 6 13,000 

Others 9,300 9,400 9,400 9,500 e 10,000 

Total 201,316 205,467 191,424 173,125 168,461 

e Estimated. p Preliminary. 



three islands: Bangka, Belitung, and Singkep. Bangka 
Island is the major tin producing area. As in Malaysia, 
Indonesia's tin industry was nearly destroyed by the 
Japanese invasion, but has recovered to assume the 
position of the world's second largest producer. 

Also in Malaysia, the Indonesian Government is 
increasing its control over the tin industry. The Govern- 
ment currently produces over 75 pet of the total tin 
production from the State-controlled company Perusa- 
haan Tambang Timah (PT Tambang Timah Persero). 
Although there are foreign interests, primarily Australia 
and the Netherlands, the state does exercise some control 
as a participating partner. Indonesian production is 
probably higher than what is reported because of 
unrecorded stockpiling. Mine capacity is significantly 
higher than production, but export controls have reduced 
production by about 40 pet of capacity. 

The majority of Indonesia's production comes from 
gravel pumps, but a significant portion originates from 
offshore dredges. Offshore dredges are becoming in- 
creasingly important because of the discovery of addition- 
al resources around Bangka, Belitung, and Singkep 
Islands. 

BOLIVIA 

Bolivia produced 24,736 mt of tin-in-concentrate in 
1983 and maintained its position as the world's third 
largest tin concentrate producer, a position held since 
1979. From 1969 to 1978, Bolivia was the second largest 
producer of tin concentrates (8). Virtually all of Bolivia's 
tin production originates from poorly managed, in- 
efficient, underground mining operations. This, combined 
with political unrest and monetary devaluations, resulted 
in a decrease of about 20-pct in estimated mine production 





1980 
Total = 201,300 mt 



1984 
Total = 166,500 mt 



Figure 3.— Estimated tin-in-concentrate production among primary MEC producers, 1980 and 1984. 



from 1981 to 1984. Miners have resorted to striking 
against the Government because of failure to pay overdue 
royalties. 

The tin mining industry is composed of three sectors: 
the nationalized mining corporation, Corporacion Minera 
de Bolivia (COMIBOL); the medium-sized mines owned by 
private companies; and the small mines run by indi- 
viduals and small partnerships. About 65 pet of Bolivia's 
total tin production originates from COMIBOL, which 
produced only about 16,000 mt of tin-in-concentrate in 
1983, down from nearly 21,000 mt in 1981. The decline in 
production in recent years has resulted from falling ore 
grades, increasingly difficult mining conditions, political 
unrest, and above-average mining costs. In 1983, tin 
concentrate and metal valued at $207 million represented 
nearly 45 pet of Bolivia's total export earnings (60 pet of 
mineral export earnings) (8). 

THAILAND 

Thailand produced 19,942 mt tin-in-concentrate in 
1983 and is currently the world's fourth largest producer. 
Thailand's tin concentrate production reached a peak in 
1979 of 33,962 mt (5). Thailand's tin industry is poorly 
organized in that much of its production is erratic and 
often unreported. 

Illegal mining and smuggling of tin concentrates out 
of the country are commonplace. Most of the production is 
from privately owned companies, many of which are 
Malaysian. The Offshore Mining Organization (OMO), a 
Government-owned mining group, controls mining areas 
which are leased to private concerns and allows small 
suction boats to recover tin, provided they sell through 
OMO's concentrate buyer. Low prices for concentrates 
have forced many suction dredge operations out of 
business and have encouraged additional smuggling to 
avoid taxes. Overall, about 60 pet of reported tin 
production originates from gravel pumps and suction 
dredges. The remaining production originates from open 
cut, underground, and other generally small operations. 



BRAZIL 

In 1983, Brazil was the fifth largest producer of tin 
concentrate in the world, producing an estimated 13,000 
mt. Brazil has increased production dramatically since 
1982, when an estimated 9,200 mt was produced (9). This 
rate of increase may not be sustainable, owing to the 
anticipated exhaustion of several mines in the near 
future. Production in 1984 was expected to approach 
17,700 mt of tin-in-concentrate. 

Although Brazil contains large resources, major prob- 
lems impede their development. Most of the known de- 
posits are deep within jungle areas, and therefore mining 
operations have to be self-sufficient with respect to power, 
water, etc. In addition, fuel costs are high, and wages must 
be lucrative to attract workers. Smuggling and theft of 
concentrates is also a problem in Brazil, where hijacking of 
concentrates during shipping has been increasing. Brazil's 
Mining Minister has predicted that the tin mining indus- 
try, which is privately operated, will continue to expand 
through the remainder of the decade (10). 

The majority of Brazil's tin originates from the 
Rondonia Province. Most of the country's tin is produced 
from gravel pump operations. 



OTHER COUNTRIES 

Approximately 25 pet of the remaining world produc- 
tion originates from Australia, the United Kingdom, 
Nigeria, Zaire, the Republic of South Africa, Peru, Burma, 
Rwanda, and other sources. The other sources supply, for 
the most part, smuggled tin. Of the above-mentioned 
countries, lode deposits in Australia and the offshore 
deposits of Burma offer excellent potential for significant- 
ly expanded production. From 1969 to 1982, Australia 
increased its tin concentrate production from 10,035 mt to 
over 12,000 mt. In 1983, production dropped to just over 
9,500 mt; production in 1984 was slightly lower. 



Tin production in the United States has historically 
been small and intermittent. The average total annual 
domestic tin production for 1980 through 1984 amounted 
to less than 100 mt tin, about a third of which originated 



as a byproduct from the Climax Molybdenum Mine in 
Colorado. Nearly all of the remainder is produced from the 
Lost River deposit, a small alluvial occurrence in Alaska. 



WORLD PRODUCTION OF TIN METAL 



Figure 4 and table 5 show the distribution of tin metal 
production. Appendix B lists tin smelter and refinery 
facilities by country and provide specific information on 
plant capacities, processing methods, and products. Over 
the last 10 yr, there has been a shift in the location of the 
tin smelting industry. Europe has been steadily losing its 
share of primary tin metal production to Southeast Asia, 
and Belgium has essentially ceased tin production. This 
has resulted from efforts on the part of countries such as 
Indonesia, Bolivia, and Brazil to realize the higher 
revenues from value-added products, decrease dependence 
on imports, train their work forces, and develop tech- 
nology. 



MALAYSIA 

Malaysia produces the largest quantity of primary tin 
in the world. Approximately 53,338 mt of primary tin was 
produced in 1983 from both domestic and foreign 
concentrates. Tin concentrates are imported from Indone- 
sia, Thailand, Auatralia, Burma, Laos and Africa. 

The two largest tin smelters in the world are located 
in Malaysia. They are the Datuk Keramat smelter on 
Penang Island and the Malaysian Smelting Corp. smelter 
at Butterworth, with annual capacities of 70,000 and 
60,000 mt, respectively. The Datuk Keramat plant 
processes the majority of foreign concentrates. 



INDONESIA 

Indonesia is the second largest manufacturer of tin 
metal among the MEC's. In 1983, Indonesia produced 
approximately 28,396 mt, or 18 pet of total known MEC 
production. Since 1977, Indonesia has smelted most of its 
own tin concentrate at a Government-operated facility in 
the city of Mentok on Bangka Island. The plant has an 
annual capacity of approximately 38,000 mt/yr of tin 
metal, using four reverberatory furnaces and three rotary 
furnaces. 

THAILAND 

Thailand is the third largest producer of tin metal 
among the MEC's. In 1983, the country produced 18,467 
mt of tin metal, which was far below smelter capacity. 
Thailand has five smelters with a combined capacity of 
about 50,000 mt and is planning for future expansion 
despite voluntary cutbacks. The largest smelter, owned by 
Thaisarco and located at Phuket, has a capacity of about 
35,000 mt. Until 1977, Thaisarco had exclusive rights to 
smelting all of Thailand's tin concentrates, but the 
Government recently granted licences to private com- 
panies, permitting construction of additional capacity. 
This change in policy resulted in an additional 14,500 mt 
of capacity, of which 10,000 mt is at the Thai Pioneer 
Corp. facility, which was built in 1982. The Thailand 
Tantalum Industries Corp. is constructing a tin slag 
treatment plant at Phuket. 





1980 
Total = 198,100 mt 



1984 
Total = 156,300 mt 



Figure 4. — Distribution of tin metal production among primary MEC producers, 1980 and 1984. 



Table 5.— Production of tin metal in selected MEC's, 1980-83, 
metric tons (5) 

Country 1980 1981 1982 19S53 

Malaysia 71,318 70,326 62,836 53,338 

Indonesia 30,465 32,51 9 29,755 28,390 

Thailand 34,689 32,636 25,460 1 8,467 

Bolivia 17,648 19,937 18,980 14,164 

Brazil 8,796 7,639 9,297 12,560 

United Kingdom 5,829 6,863 8,164 6,498 

Netherlands 1 , 1 48 3,500 2,757 3,650 

Australia 4,819 4,286 3,105 2,878 

Spain 3,750 3,070 2,750 2,783 

United States 3,000 2,087 2,000 2,500 

South Africa, Republic of .... 2,207 2,174 2,197 2,200 

Singapore 4,000 4,000 4,000 1 ,800 

Nigeria 2,684 2,489 1 ,691 1 ,400 

Japan 1,319 1,313 1,296 1,260 

Zaire 213 450 352 134 

Belgium 2,822 65 

Others 3,405 3,135 3,519 4,231 

Total 198,112 196,489 178,159 156,253 



BOLIVIA 

Bolivia produced 14,164 mt of tin metal in 1983. The 
tin smelting industry in Bolivia is relatively new. Before 
1977, approximately two-thirds of Bolivia's tin was 
exported as tin-in-concentrate for smelting in the United 
States and the United Kingdom. Currently, Bolivia has 
enough smelter capacity to produce about 28,000 mt of tin 
metal. About 25,000 mt of this capacity is at the 
Government-owned-and-operated Empresa Nacional de- 
Fundiciones (ENAF) at Vintos, which accepts about half 
of COMIBOL's concentrate production. Bolivia also has 
large fuming plants that recover tin dust from very 
low-grade concentrates. COMIBOL has expressed con- 
siderable discontent with ENAF owing to the low 
payments it receives for concentrates. The mines claim 
that more attractive rates are available in the United 
States and the United Kingdom. Approximately 11,000 
mt tin-in-concentrate was exported for processing in 1983. 
As of late 1984, ENAF was considering adding a 
processing plant to recover gold, silver, and indium from 
smelter slags (11). 



BRAZIL 

Brazil produced nearly 12,560 mt of tin metal in 1983, 
while in 1979 it only produced 9,300 mt. Several smelters 
were built to treat Brazilian and foreign concentrates, but 
in 1981, prohibitive taxes and import duties were imposed 
which have resulted in little or no imports. Prior to 1981, 
material was received from Bolivia and Singapore. As of 
1984, Brazil had at least 10 smelters with a combined 
capacity of about 38,000 mt/yr (9), but was operating 
significantly under design capacity. Brazil is not a 
member of the ITC. The fact that the smelters are 
operating at less than capacity results from slower than 
anticipated mine development. The two largest smelters 
are the Mamore smelter owned by Paranapanema at Sao 



Paulo and the CESBRA smelter at Volta Redonda. They 
have annual capacities of about 12,000 mt each. 



UNITED KINGDOM 

The United Kingdom has maintained sixth position 
among the market economy producers since prior to 1978. 
In 1983, approximately 6,498 mt of tin was produced. The 
United Kingdom is a net importer of tih and therefore, has 
not been required to reduce consumption, as have the 
other ITC members. In 1983, approximately 65 pet of the 
country's tin consumption came from domestic sources 
(12). 



CENTRALLY PLANNED ECONOMY COUNTRIES 

Both China and the U.S.S.R. produce large quantities 
of tin, although little is exported. Reliable data regarding 
individual mining operations, concentrate production, and 
tin manufacturing capabilities are difficult to acquire. 
Because of this, tin resources of the centrally planned 
economy (CPE) countries (as listed in footnote 4) are not 
included in the availability section of this report. 

China's tin production has been expanding over the 
last decade. The 1979 production estimates ranged from 
15,000 to 25,000 mt/yr (13-14). Production in 1980 was 
estimated at 14,600 mt (13). Most of China's tin 
production originates from underground mines in the 
southwest and central regions, and over 80 pet is intended 
for domestic consumption. China's tin exports peaked in 
1978 at 5,486 mt and in 1983 decreased to 3,259 mt (5). 
This downward trend will probably continue as China's 
industry becomes more vertically integrated and demand 
exceeds domestic production. Unless the mining industry 
expands. China could become a net importer. About 60 pet 
of China's exported tin is purchased by the United States, 
while Japan and Hong Kong purchase about 16 and 18 
pet, respectively (5). China has about six existing tin 
smelters and is planning for additional capacity with 
construction of a seventh smelter currently underway. 

The major tin producing mines in the U.S.S.R. are in 
Eastern Siberia. Nearly all of the tin is produced from lode 
deposits using underground mining methods. The Soviet 
Union is still a net importer of tin despite estimates 
indicating annual domestic production as high as 35,000 
mt (15). In 1983, the U.S.S.R. reportedly imported over 
16,000 mt of tin metal (5). About 69 pet originated from 
Malaysia, 3 pet from Bolivia, and the remainder from 
other countries not identified. At least some of the 
imported tin is purchased from Singapore and probably 
originates as smuggled tin. During the last 6 yr, U.S.S.R. 
imports have been relatively stable, ranging from a high 
of 14,337 mt in 1981 to a low of 12,017 mt in 1982 and 
averaging about 13,500 mt (5). 



THE INTERNATIONAL TIN COUNCIL 



HISTORY 

Attempts to stabilize the production and price of tin 
can be traced to as early as 1921, when the Bandoeng Pool 



was formed. This pool was set up by Malaya and the 
Netherlands East Indies for the purpose of holding 
accumulated tin stocks off the market in order to maintain 
the price at an acceptable level. The pool bought almost 



10 



20,000 mt of tin in 1921 and did not begin to dispose of it 
until April 1923. The tin was sold off at the rate of 5 pet 
per month thereafter until December 1924 (13). 

Tin prices generally increased during the 1920's, but 
collapsed with the onset of the Great Depression in 1929. 
Various tin producers attempted to withhold supply by 
building inventories, in order to stabilize plummeting tin 
prices, but the sharp drop in demand made such attempts 
impossible to maintain. In the early 1930's, Bolivia and 
Nigeria joined with the two original Bandoeng Pool 
operators in various control schemes: the First Interna- 
tional Tin Agreement of 1931-33, which established the 
International Tin Committee; followed by two other 
agreements (1934-36 and 1937-41), which included Siam 
(Thailand), the Belgian Congo (Zaire) and French Indo- 
china (Southeast Asia). 

The general principle of these early agreements was 
the regulation of production by a system of quotas 
enforced by Government action. The first agreement did 
not include any provision for control over stocks. 
Succeeding tin agreements, however, included the opera- 
tion of a buffer stock, or tin pool, with the stated objective 
of preventing rapid price fluctuations. By 1938, a buffer 
stock with floor and ceiling price levels was adopted to 
regulate the pool. The ranges of the pool were set to match 
the London Metal Exchange (LME) quotes. The members 
of the International Tin Committee contributed to the 
buffer stock a percentage of their production; the original 
buffer stock consisted of 10,200 mt of tin. 

The first two tin agreements of the 1930's had no 
provision for representation from consuming countries, 
and the International Tin Committee was criticized by the 
consuming nations, particularly the United States, for 
restraint of trade and operating as a cartel. In reaction to 
the criticism, the two succeeding tin agreements included 
invitations to the United States and the United Kingdom 
to attend and offer their viewpoints at Committee 
meetings. 

The final agreement, the Fourth Control Pack, was 
terminated in 1946. Although the International Tin 
Committee began work on framing a fifth agreement 
intended to come into force in 1947, disagreements 
between the Committee members prevented its adoption 
and led to the holding of the International Tin Conference 
in 1946. The attending nations agreed on little except that 
the International Tin Committee was defunct and that an 
International Study Group should be set up to formulate 
requirements for a new tin agreement. 

The International Tin Study Group met in Brussels in 
April 1947 and continued to operate until 1956, seeking to 
organize a viable tin organization. Most of the arguments 
and obstacles to an agreement centered around export 
controls, the size of the buffer stock, and possible price 
ranges of the buffer stock. The study group was composed 
of both producing and consuming nations (26), although 
there was considerable antagonism between the United 
States, the primary consumer, and the producing coun- 
tries. Even with demand increasing, owing to U.S. 
stockpile purchases and the requirements of the Korean 
War, fears of a new surplus of tin exacerbated the desire of 
the producing countries to generate a new form of control 
over the tin market. 

The Second U.N. International Tin Conference, held 
in 1953, led to the First Post- War International Tin 
Agreement and the formation of the International Tin 
Council (ITC). There have been six agreements (as of 
1984), with each in effect for approximately 5 yr. The 



current Council consists of six producing and 17 consum- 
ing countries, as shown in table 6. All of the producing 
countries, except Australia (which joined in 1971), have 
been members since the original 1956 agreement. The 
member producing countries accounted for over 57 pet of 
total MEC production in 1983. This percentage would 
have been over 80 pet had Bolivia and Brazil opted to join 
the sixth ITC in 1982. The original consuming countries 
in the ITC were Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, 
Ecuador, France, India, the Netherlands, Spain, and the 
United Kingdom. The United States joined the Fifth 
Agreement in 1976, but did not join the Sixth Agreement 
in 1982. 



Table 6.— Membership and vote distribution of Sixth 
International Tin Agreement as of July 1983 (4) 

Member countries Vote 

Producing members: 

Australia 94 

Indonesia 247 

Malaysia 401 

Nigeria 22 

Thailand 216 

Zaire 20 

Total, producing members 1 ,000 

Consuming members: 

Canada 49 

European Economic Community (EEC): 

Belgium-Luxembourg 29 

Denmark 6 

Finland 7 

France 104 

Germany, Federal Republic of 154 

Greece 10 

India 31 

Ireland 5 

Italy 58 

Japan 334 

Netherlands 61 

Norway 10 

Poland 42 

Sweden 7 

Switzerland 13 

United Kingdom 80 

Total, consuming members 1 ,000 



ORGANIZATIONAL BREAKDOWN 

The ITC is divided into two groups, producing and 
consuming nations; each group has an equal weight of 
1,000 votes (table 6). Each of the nations receives five 
initial votes, plus additional votes in proportion to its tin 
production or consumption. The input by consuming 
nations prevents the formation of a cartel, in which only 
producers set a price. The Council periodically changes 
the proportion of the votes according to the latest 
production and consumption statistics. 

The consuming nations are permitted to produce tin, 
which has caused problems by reducing the market for 
Malaysia, Indonesia, and other producing nations. Cana- 
da's development of the East Kemptville property and 
expansion of the United Kingdom's Cornwall District are 
expected to result in decreased imports by these nations. 



OBJECTIVES 

The First International Tin Agreement laid down 
three goals for all members: (1) to prevent or alleviate 
widespread unemployment in the tin industry, (2) to stop 
excessive price fluctuations, and (3) to ensure adequate 



supplies at reasonable prices. By the fourth agreement 
(1971-76), the number of basic principles had increased to 
10, with a preamble recognizing that such a commodity 
agreement is in the best interests of both consuming and 
producing nations. The 10 principles (16) were to — 



1. Provide for adjustment between world production 
and consumption and alleviate serious difficulties arising 
from surpluses or shortages. 

2. Prevent excessive price fluctuations. 

3. Increase export earnings, thereby providing mem- 
bers with resources for accelerated economic and social 
growth. 

4. Ensure conditions that will help to achieve a 
dynamic and rising rate of production, which will secure 
an adequate supply at fair prices and provide a long-term 
equilibrium between production and consumption. 

5. Prevent widespread unemployment. 

6. Increase production and distribute supplies fairly 
in the event of a shortage. 

7. Mitigate difficulties producing countries might 
encounter as a result of a surplus. 

8. Review disposals of noncommercial stocks by 
governments and avoid uncertainties and difficulties that 
might arise. 

9. Review the need for development and exploitation 
of new deposits and promote the most efficient methods of 
mining tin ores and smelting concentrates. 

10. Continue the work of the previous agreements. 
Throughout the history of the postwar tin agree- 
ments, the ITC has had the use of two main instruments to 
pursue its objectives: the control of exports and manage- 
ment of the buffer stock. These instruments have been 
used with varying degrees of success. Export controls are 
considered to be the most effective tool to avoid long-term 
surpluses in the tin industry. The ITC can declare any 



11 



quarter an export control period, meaning that it can then 
determine the quantities of tin that may be exported 
through allocation of country export quotas. The sixth 
agreement was based on export controls of 36 pet of total 
production, and this cutback was later increased to 39.6 
pet of production. Such an extreme quota on exports was 
required to mitigate the effects of increased production by 
non-ITC members, particularly Brazil, a drop in world 
demand and continued sales from the GSA stockpile. In 
operating the buffer stock, the buffer stock manager was 
bound under the following conditions of the sixth 
agreement (16, p. 77): 

1. If the market price of tin is equal to or greater than 
the ceiling price, the maximum agreed-on market price, 
the manager must sell until the market price of tin falls 
below the ceiling price or the tin at his disposal is 
exhausted, unless instructed to the contrary by the 
Council. 

2. Within the upper section of the allowable price 
range, the Manager may operate provided he is a net seller 
of tin. 

3. If the market price is in the middle section of the 
range, the manager may only operate with the authority of 
the Council. 

4. If the price is in the lower section of the range, the 
manager may operate, provided he is a net buyer of tin. 

5. If the price is equal to or lower than the floor price, 
the manager must buy tin until the price is above the floor 
price or his funds are exhausted, unless instructed to the 
contrary by the Council. 

At the end of June 1984, buffer stock holdings totaled 
more than 35,000 mt (4). Continued production and 
exports of large quantities of tin from non-ITC countries, 
primarily Bolivia, Brazil, Peru, and China forced signi- 
ficant additional purchases by the Buffer Stock Manager 
(17). 



FORMATION OF THE ASSOCIATION OF TIN PRODUCING COUNTRIES 



Although the ITC has been successful in keeping the 
price of tin at or above the floor price of M$29.15/kg 6 
(approximately US$5.65/lb), disagreements among ITC 
members and nonmembers prompted the formation of a 
separate organization, the Association of Tin Producing 
Countries (ATPC). The Association was founded on March 
29, 1983, following a meeting of ministers from the tin 
producing countries of Australia, Bolivia, Indonesia, 
Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, and Zaire. The ATPC's 
defined aims are to "foster close cooperation among 
member countries with a view to safeguarding their 
interests in the tin industry through the maintenance of 
remunerative and stable prices and intensification of 
research and development, and marketing to further 
expand the use of tin" (18). The organization was 
formalized in August 1983 with six founding members: 
Bolivia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, and 
Zaire. Australia joined in November after receiving 



assurances that the ATPC would not follow policies that 
would bring the organization into conflict with the 
operations of the Sixth International Tin Agreement (4). 
The ATPC has made a public commitment to augment and 
supplement the work of the ITC. It may be a useful 
organization if expected higher levels of producer financ- 
ing for the International Tin Research Institute help 
develop new uses and markets for tin. 

In the fall of 1984, members of the ATPC, except for 
Zaire, met to discuss the stabilization of tin prices. The 
primary reason for the meeting was to address the 
problem of some producers not responding to requests for 
decreased production. The statement was specifically 
directed towards Brazil (19), which is not a member of the 
ATPC. Although Brazil did not agree to reduce produc- 
tion, the Brazilian mines minister stated that he would 
not sell tin below stated international tin prices. 



SMUGGLING 



The ITC estimates that about 16,000 mt of tin-in- 
concentrate was smuggled out of Southeast Asia in 1983 
(20). This represents approximately 15 pet of the total 

6 M$ denotes Malaysian ringgits. 



production from this region and 10 pet of total accountable 
MEC production. Smuggling is encouraged by high export 
taxes, especially in Thailand, as well as voluntary export 



12 



controls (e.g., a 39.6-pct cutback) by the ITC member 
nations. Sales quotas have caused marginal producers to 
sell some of their output on the black market (20). 

Over the last few years, the Southeast Asian tin 
producers and other members of the ITC concentrated 
their efforts to reduce the amount of smuggled tin 
reaching the market. Smuggled tin has been discovered in 
fishing boats, trucks, cars, and even in the hollow tubes of 
bicycle frames (20). In 1983, only about 135 mt of tin was 
seized by Malaysian police, but this is about twice that 
recovered in 1982 (21). The ITC estimates that 12,000 mt 
of tin will be smuggled in 1984. 

One of the major reasons for the availability of 
smuggled tin on the metals market is the apparent 
willingness of the smelter operators in Singapore to accept 
tin concentrates without questioning their origins. Tbe 
flow of smuggled material received by Singapore is 
estimated at 5,000 to 6,000 mt/yr of tin-in-concentrate 
(22). This amount could increase without successful 
preventive measures. From 1972 to 1982, Singapore 
increased annual exports of tin from 1,000 mt/yr to 11,000 
mt/yr (23), most of which was believed to have originated 
from Thailand. 

Singapore sells large quantities of tin concentrate 
despite the fact that it has no domestic tin production. 
Several attempts have been made by foreign countries to 



impress upon Singapore the seriousness of the problem. 
The Netherlands Government requested the Billiton 
Group, a Netherlands-based company, to stop accepting 
Other attempts to control smuggling include provid- 
ing greater search and seizure power to authorities in tin 
producing countries, increased penalties for people con- 
victed of smuggling, and requiring much greater 
documentaton of the source of tin concentrates received 
for processing in Malaysia (25). Although there has been 
some smuggling of tin in other regions of the world, it is 
not of the same magnitude as that in southeast Asia. 
tin concentrate from Singapore to feed the tin smelter at 
its Arnhem facility, which has a 2,500-mt/yr capacity 
(24). However, the director of the Billiton plant refused to 
comply, saying that it is impossible to differentiate 
between legal and illegal concentrates (23). The ITC 
requested that the LME stop buying Watten and Kimetal 
ingots which are the marketing brand names for 
Singapore's tin metal. But the LME declined the request 
(21). Spain and the Soviet Union have also been asked to 
stop purchasing tin metal and tin concentrates from 
Singapore (21 -22). Singapore has been approached directly 
by the tin producing nations in an attempt to control the 
production of tin from smuggled sources. However, the 
Singapore Government has not taken any action since the 
original appeals for control were made in December 1983. 



GEOLOGY AND RESOURCES 



This section discusses the geology and resources of tin 
deposits by country. In some cases, only one deposit was 
evaluated in a country. Most of the reported tonnage and 
grade data were gathered by Bureau field offices or 
contractors. The tonnage and grade data in this report 
may not conform to the reserve and resource estimate 
methodologies previously defined by the Bureau or the 
U.S. Geological Survey (26). Table 7 and figure 5 
summarize the demonstrated resource information for the 
146 MEC tin deposits or regions 7 evaluated in this study. 
Table 8 lists the MEC deposits and regions by country and 
name, mining method, ownership, and status. The 
locations of the evaluated tin deposits and regions are 
illustrated in figure 6. 

Several additional caveats to the above resource 
estimates must be made to place world tin resources in the 
proper perspective. These caveats have to do with — 

The type of resource data that are reported; 

The type of resource occurrence that accounts for 
production in an individual country; and 

The static nature of resource estimates for this type of 
study. 

First, the type of resource data that are reported often 
vary because of government policies and a reluctance on 
the part of many mining companies to divulge data on 
their mining operations. The companies' reluctance is due 
to a number of factors. Among them is the desire to 
minimize or avoid taxation in countries that tax the value 



"Some information is aggregated by region because several hundred very 
small operations may be producing within a distinct region or state. The 
large number of these small operations precludes any (1) cost-effective 
method for evaluating each operation, or (2) an efficient method for 
presenting data. Therefore, large numbers of small tin operations within a 
distinct region are evaluated and discussed as one region. 



of unmined mineral resources. Also, most publicly held 
mining companies are required to report their reserves (as 
opposed to resources) annually to various institutions. For 
valid reasons, these annual reported reserves are usually 
defined as ore that has been developed on at least three 
sides and assayed as thoroughly as required. These 





Table 7. — Tin resources by country 




Number In situ ore 


Country 


Of Amount ' Av fpprl grarfp 

deposits 10 6 mt pet Sn 2 Contained • Recoverable 



Argentina 
Australia 
Bolivia . 
Brazil . . . 
Burma . . 
Canada 
Indonesia 
Japan . . 
Malaysia 
Namibia 
Nigeria . 

Peru 

South Africa 

Republic 

of 

Thailand . . 
United 

Kingdom 
United 

States 

Zaire 

Zimbabwe . 
Other 4 .... 



1 

10 

28 

18 

2 

1 

7 

2 

36 

2 

1 

1 



3 
25 



1 
1 

1 
( 5 ) 



W 

307 

248 

160 

26 

58 

4,594 

5 

15,349 

54 

147 

W 



10 
2.076 



36 
25 



13 

56 



W 
0.104 
.086 
.046 
.073 
200 
.019 
.277 
.009 
.141 
.015 

W 



.616 
.021 

.358 

.151 
288 
.209 
.238 



W 

318 

211 

73 

19 

NA 

865 

14 

1.315 

76 

22 

W 



61 

437 



3 

185 

137 

67 

9 

59 

685 

7 

1,099 

57 

16 

34 



29 

270 



128 

38 

24 

27 

135 



87 

19 
19 
17 
( 5 ) 



Total 



146 



23,117 



.016 



3,784 



2,799 



NA Not available. 

W Withheld to avoid disclosing confidential deposit data; included in 
"Other." 

1 Rounded to nearest million. 

2 Rounded to 3 significant figures. 

3 Rounded to nearest thousand. 

4 Argentina and Peru combined. 

5 Aggregated data for Argentina and Peru. 



13 



Canada 
3 pet 
United Kingdom 
3 pet 




Canada 
2pcf 
United Kingdom 
3 pet 



KEY 

| Producers 
\ ' '] Nonproducers 




In situ 
Total = 3,784 ,000 mt 



Recoverable 
Tota I = 2,799,000 mt 



Figure 5.— Distribution of in situ and recoverable tin among evaluated countries. 




ISOUTH 
ft M [ R I C A 




LEGEND 

• Individual tin-bearing deposit 
^fe Important stanniferous area 

NOTE. — Numbers correspond to those shown in 
table 8, which lists deposits and regions by name 



Figure 6. — Locations of evaluated tin deposits and regions. 



14 



Table 8.— Market economy country tin deposits, general information 



Country and deposit 



Owner and/or operator 



Mining method 



Status 1 



Map 
location 2 



Argentina: Pirquitas Sociedad Minera Pirquitas Pichetti y Cia., S.A. 

Australia: 

Ardlethan 

Baal Gammon 

Cleveland 

Greenbushes 

Mt. Bischoff 



Mt. Garnet-Ravenshoe Oakbridge Ltd. 



Aberfoyle Ltd 

Newmont Holding Pty. Ltd 

Aberfoyle Ltd 

Greenbushes Tin NL 

CRA Exploration Pty. Ltd. (51 pet) 



Pioneer 

Renison . 

Ruxton Area 

Taronga 

Bolivia: 

Atoroma 

Avicaya 

Bolivar 

Carocoles 

Cerro Rico 

Chojlla 

Chorolque 

Colavi 

Colquiri 

Comsur 

El Centenario 

Estalsa (gravel pump) . . . 

Estalsa (dredge) 

Huanuni 

Japo 

Kellguani 

La Reyna 

Milluni 

Morococala 

Potosi 

San Jose de Ayata 

San Juan 

Santa Barbara 

Santa Fe 

Suka 

Totoral 

Viloco 

Yana Mallcu 

Brazil: 

Cachoeirinha-Bom Futuro 

Candeias-Sao Domingo . 

Ceriumbras 

Cortez 

Duduca 

Massangana 



Triako (45.25 pet), Buka (45.25 pet) 
Renison Goldfields Consolidated Ltd. 

Metals Exploration Ltd 

Newmont Holdings Pty., Ltd 



Underground 

Open pit 

. . do 

Underground 
Open pit 

. . do 

Dredge 

Gravel pump. 
Underground 

Open pit 

do 



Empresa Minera Atoroma Ltda 

do 

Corporacion Minera de Bolivia (COMIBOL) . 

do 

Banco Minero de Bolivia (BAMIN) 

International Mining Co 

COMIBOL 

do 

do 

Compania Minera del Sur S. A. (COMSUR) 

COMIBOL 

Estalsa Boliviana 

.do 

COMIBOL 

do 

Empresa Minera Kellguani 

Sabino Llave 

COMSUR 

COMIBOL 

..do 

Empresa Minera Pabon Ltda 

Waldo Sarmiento 

Santa Barbara Mining Co 

COMIBOL 

Compania Minera Suka Ltda 

Cia. Minera Orlandini Ltda 

COMIBOL 

Empresa Minera Yana Mallcu 



Underground 
do 



do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

Dredge 

do 

Gravel pump 

Dredge 

Underground 

do 



Mocambo . . 
Novo Mundo 
Pitinga 



Poco 

Potosi 

Potosi Hill .... 
Rhodia-Espeng 
San Laurenco . 
Sao Francisco 

Sao Raimundo 
Serra Branca . 
Taboquinha . . . 
Burma: 
Mawchi 



Moacyrmotta Brumadinho 

Empresas Brumadinho S.A 

Best Metais e Soldas 

Brascan Recursos Naturais S. A 

. . do 

Paranapanema S.A. Mineracao, Industria e 

Construcao, operator: local owner. 

Mineracao Sao Jose 

Brascan Recursos Naturais S. A 

Paranapanema S.A. Mineracao, Industria e 

Construcao 

Brascan Recursos Naturais S.A 

do 

. . do 

Canopus 

Empresas Brumadinho S.A 

Paranapanema S.A. Mineracao, Industria e 

Construcao, operator; local owner 

. do 

Mineracao Gondwana 

Brascan Recursos Naturais S.A 



do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 



Dredge ... 
. . do 

do 

do 

Gravel pump 
. . do 



do 
do 
do 



. . do 

do 

Open pit 

Gravel pump 

do 

. . do 



Burmese Government 



Tenasserim Valley gravel pump do 



Rio Algom Ltd. 



P.T. Riau Tin Mining 

P.T. Broken Hill Pty, Indonesia 
Kajuara Mining Corp. (Pty.) Ltd. 

P.T. Tambang Timah 

.do 

. . do 

. . do 



Canada: East Kemptville 
Indonesia: 

Bima dredge 

Kelapa Kampit 

P.T. Koba Tin 

P.T. Tambang Timah (Banghah) 
Do 

P.T. Tambang Timah (Belitung) 

Do 

Japan: 

Akenobe Akenobe Mining Corp. Ltd. 

Suzuyama Tin Kyoma Mining Co 

Malaysia: 

Austral Amalgamated Austral Amalgamated Tin Bhd 

Ayer Hitam Ayer Hitam, Tronoh, MMC . . 

Do do 

Berjuntai Malaysian Mining Co 

Bidor Malaya Bidor Malaya Tin Sdn. Bhd. . 

Gopeng Consolidated gravel pumps Gopeng Consolidated PLC . . 

Johor State Multiple ownership 

Kedah gravel pump mines Privately owned 



Dredge 

Open pit 
Gravel pump 

Underground 
Gravel pump 
Open pit ... 



Dredge 

Underground 
Gravel pump 

Dredge 

Gravel pump 

Dredge 

Gravel pump 

Underground 
. . do 



1 P Producer; N Nonproducer or undeveloped 

2 Numbers correspond to location shown in figure 6. 

NOTE. — Other deposits, which were investigated but not evaluated in this study, are listed in appendix A. 



Dredge 

Gravel pump 

Dredge 

. . do 

do 

Gravel pump 

do 

. . do 



19 
22 
17 
16 
17 
22 
18 
17 
21 
20 

5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 

5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 

3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 

8 
3 
9 

3 
3 
3 
8 
8 
3 

8 

7 
3 

15 

15 

2 

15 
15 
15 
15 
15 
15 
15 

23 
24 

15 
15 
15 
15 
15 
15 
15 
15 



Table 8. — Market economy country tin deposits, general information — Continued 



15 



Country and deposit 



Owner and/or operator 



Mining method 

do 

Dredge 

. . do 

. . do 

do 

. . do 

. . do 

do 

do 

do 

Gravel pump 

. . do 

Dredge 

.do 

Gravel pump 

Dredge 

Gravel pump 

Dredge 

..do 

Open pit 

Underground 

Dredge 

do 

do 

Gravel pump 

Dredge 

. . do 

do 

Open pit 

..do 

Dredge 

Underground 

do 

. . do 

. . do 

Dredge 

. . do 

Gravel pump 

Dredge 

Gravel pump 

. . do 

Open pit 

Gravel pump 

Dredge 

Open pit 

Dredge 

Gravel pump 

Dredge 

Gravel pump 

. . do 

Dredge 

Open pit 

Dredge 

. . do 

Underground 

Gravel pump 

..do 

Dredge 

Gravel pump 

Open pit 

Underground 

Dredge 

Underground 

. . do 

. . do 

. . do 

Open pit 

Gravel pump 

open pit. 
Underground 



Status 1 



Map 
location 2 



Killinghall 

Kinta Kellas dredge 

Kramat dredge 

Kuala Langat 

Lower Perak dredge 
Malayan dredge 



Ramuda Sdn. Bhd. and Straits Trading Co. 

Kinta Kellas Tin Dredging Bhd 

Kramat Tin Dredge Bhd 

Kumpulan Perangsang Selangor 

Lower Perak Tin Dredging Bhd. 
Malaysian Mining Co. 



Mambang Di-Awan Gopeng Consolidated, Syarikat Permodalan 



ML4 

Modal Sri Pandan 



Pacific Tin Consol. . . . 
Pahang gravel pump . 

Perak State 

Perangsang Berjuntai 



Kumpulan Perangsang Selangor 

Pahang Development Corp. (70 pet), Conzinc 

Riotinto Malaysia (30 pet). 

Pacific Tin Consolidated Corp. (85 pet) 

Multiple ownership 

.do 

Permodalan National Bhd. (70 pet), Berjuntai Tin 

Dredging Bhd. (30 pet). 

Petaling Tin Bhd 

Rahman Hydraulic Tin Bhd 



Petaling 

Rahman Hydraulic 

Selangor dredge Selangor Dredging Bhd 

Selangor gravel pumps Multiple owners 

Southern Kinta Consolidated Malaysia Mining Co 

Southern Malayan dredge do 

Sungei Besi Mines Sungei Besi Mines Ltd 

Sungei Lembing Pahang Consolidated PLC 

Syarikat Lombong Sebina Pahang Development Corp. (70 pet), Conzinc 

Riotinto Malaysia (30 pet) 



Timah Dermawan 

Timah Langsat . . 

Do 

Do 



Malaysian Mining Co. (40 pet), Tronoh (30 pet), 
Perak State (30 pet). 

Timah Langsat Bhd 

. . do 

. . do 



Timah Matang Malaysia Mining Co. 



Tronoh Mines Malaysia 
Namibia: 

Brandberg West 

Uis 

Nigeria: Amalgamated tin mine, Bisichi 

Peru: San Rafael 

South Africa, Republic of: 

Rooiberg Mine 

Union Tin Mines 

Zaaiplaats tin mine 

Thailand: 

Aokam 

Bangrin tin dredge 

Batun Mine 



do 



South West Africa Co., Ltd 

Industrial Minerals Mining Corp. (Pty.) Ltd. 

Nigerian Mining Corp 

Minsur, S.A 



Rooilberg Tin Ltd 

Union Tin Mines Ltd 

Zimro and Zaaiplaats Tin Mining 



Aokam Thai Ltd. ... 
Fairmont State Ltd. 
Phuket Mining Co. Ltd. 



Bodan dredge Thai Government (Offshore Mining Organization). 

Central Region gravel pump Multiple local ownership 

Charintr Charintr Mining Co 

Eurothai Mine Eurothai Mining Co 

Hok Chong Seng Hok Chong Seng 

Hok Chong Seng suction dredge . . do 

Labu Mine Sawad Wattonayagorn 

Narai dredge Billiton Nederland BV (operator), Thai Government 

(owner). 

Ngan Thawi Brothers Co Ngan Thawi Brothers Co 

Do do 

Nok Hoog Mine Sombat Co., Lte 

Northern Region gravel pumps Multiple local ownership . . 

Thai Government 

Bandit Tantivit 

Sethasap Karnral Co 

Fairmont State Ltd 

. . do 

Thai Nationals and Pacific Tin 



Phangnga suction boats 

Pinyok Mine 

Sethasup Karnrae Co. Ltd. 

Siamese Tin Syndicate Ltd. 

Sichon Mine 

Sierra Mining Co 

Southern Region gravel pumps . Multiple local ownership 

Tongkah Harbour -. Tongkah Harbour Ltd 

Yip In Tsoi — Yala pump Yip In Tsoi 

Yip In Tsoi — Haad Yala Ope do 

United Kingdom: 

Geevor tin mine Geevor Tin Mines Ltd. (RTZ Ltd.) 

Marine Mining Marine (Cornwall) Mining Ltd. (consortium) .... 

Redmoor Southwest Minerals Ltd 

South Crofty Pendarves district South Crofty PLC 

Wheal Concord property Wheal Concord Ltd 

Wheal Jane-Mt. Wellington Carnon Consolidated Tin Mines Ltd. (RTZ Ltd.). 

United States: Lost River Bering Straits Native Corp 

Zaire: Kivu Mine Sominki 



Zimbabwe: Kamativi tin mine Industrial Development Corp. of Zimbabwe 



' P Producer, N Nonproducer or undeveloped. 
2 Numbers correspond to location shown in figure 6. 
NOTE. — Other deposits, which were investigated but not evaluated in this study, are listed in appendix A. 



P 


15 


p 


15 


p 


15 


N 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


N 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


N 


12 


P 


12 


P 


10 


P 


4 


P 


13 


P 


13 


P 


13 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


15 


P 


25 


N 


25 


N 


25 


P 


25 


P 


25 


P 


15 


N 


11 


P 


11 



14 



16 



"proven reserves" are defined each year based on 
production, new development, new assays, changes in 
prices and costs and, sometimes, changes in technology. 
Exploration work to delineate resources is a costly and 
time-consuming endeavor; therefore, it is not done by 
small operators or poor countries such as Bolivia, or even 
some large operators that have been in production for a 
long time. Many mining operations will not estimate 
below the proven reserve levels. 

The larger, more established mining areas generally 
have the best estimation methodology and reporting. This 
study, by necessity, deals only with countries and areas 
where enough basic deposit information is collected and 
reported that it is possible to estimate demonstrated 
resources with some reasonable degree of confidence. As a 
result, over 88 pet of the recoverable resources estimated 
in this study is contained in producing mines, and all of 
the undeveloped deposits evaluated are located in 
established tin producing countries. 

Second, the resource tonnage estimates for this study 
were derived solely from the 146 mines and deposits that 
were evaluated. Thus, the resource estimates exclude the 
resources of a number of very small tin producers and 
producing mines that produce byproduct tin (such as the 
Climax Mine in Colorado). 

Third, the resource estimates for this study reflect 
demonstrated resource estimates circa 1981-82 minus 
estimated production from producing mines for the 
intervening years to January 1984. This implies that no 
new reserves or demonstrated resources have been added to 
replace that production, which is doubtful. For all of these 
reasons, the demonstrated resource estimates presented 
in this report must be considered conservative. 

Several varieties of tin minerals and compounds occur 
in the Earth's crust (table 9). The most common and 
economically viable tin mineral is cassiterite (Sn0 2 ). 
Cassiterite is spatially associated with biotite or biotite- 
muscovite granites or their extrusive equivalents. Most of 
the world's producing tin deposits occur in either distinct, 
rather narrow belts of tin-bearing granites in a larger 
intrusive complex or in more diffuse belts of younger 
granites in extensive areas of Precambrian rocks (27). The 
most productive of these regions is a granitic belt that 
extends from Indonesia through Malaysia and Thailand 
and into China. Most of this production is from placer- type 
deposits (28). In 1983, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand 
yielded over 50 pet of the world's primary tin. 

Most economic tin deposits occur as residual concen- 
trates or placer deposits in soils, streams, and seabeds. 
Lateritic weathering of the granites liberated the hard, 
chemically resistant cassiterite, which concentrated to 
form these types of tin deposits. The association of 
tin-bearing granites and tropical weathering conditions 
around the equatorial regions explains the abundance of 
placer tin deposits in Southeast Asia and other similar 
geologic environments and geographic regions. 

Sainsbury and Reed (27) grouped the major seondary 
or placer tin deposits into five categories, as follows: 

1. Alluvial placers — These constitute the highest 
grade placers and the largest commercial tin deposits in 
the world. They are formed near lodes in streams where 
the current velocity allows for the separation of cassiter- 
ite. Alluvial placers occur in both "modern" and "fossil" 
streambeds, with the tin distribution being dependent on 
the location of the tin source and the hydraulics of the 
stream. In Southeast Asia, some stream placers accumu- 



lated and were later submerged during Pleistocene 
eustatic sea level changes. Most alluvial placer deposits 
are free of deleterious constituents and rarely contain as 
much as 70 pet Sn. 

2. Residual placers — These are in situ deposits 
formed directly over a bedrock source. They may grade 
downward into a weathered lode and often contain other 
economically significant heavy minerals such as col- 
umbite-tantalite. Often, residual placers in Indonesia are 
cemented by iron oxides, creating a "kaksa", which must 
be crushed to free the cassiterite. 

3. Eluvial placers — These are formed by the down- 
slope gravity separation of cassiterite. There may be 
residual placers upslope and alluvial (stream) placers 
downslope. 

4. Marine placers — Most of these are beach placers or 
inundated beach placers. They form where a marine 
shoreline intersects a stream valley containing alluvial 
cassiterite or a bedrock source of tin. Placers of this type 
have yielded large amounts of cassiterite at Bangka and 
Billiton Islands in Indonesia. 

5. Fossil placers — Any of the above-mentioned de- 
posits may become fossil placers as a result of burial 
beneath younger sediments or lava. Uplift and erosion of 
fossil placers have yielded "second-cycle" alluvial placers 
such as those in Nigeria. The gravels of some fossil placers 
have lithified to such an extent that they must be mined 
as lode deposits. 

About one-third of the tin mined in the world is from 
lode deposits. Lode deposits, as outlined by Sainsbury and 
Reed (28), include the following types: 

1. Pegmatite deposits — These deposits are generally 
associated with granitic rocks and may contain significant 
byproducts such as columbite-tantalite, beryl, and spo- 
dumene. The most productive tin-bearing pegmatites 
occur in Precambrian-age rocks such as the Manono 
deposit in Zaire and the Minas Gerais districts in Brazil. 
The tin content is rarely greater than 0.3 pet in pegmatite 
deposits (28). 

2. Pneumatolytic-hydrothermal deposits— Most of 
the major lode tin deposits of the world (except in Bolivia), 
including those at Cornwall and in the U.S.S.R., are this 
type (27, 28). They are in or near biotite or biotite- 
muscovite granites and form replacement, fissure-filling, 
or greisen deposits in many types of country rock. These 
deposits vary widely in mineralogy and contain cassiter- 
ite, topaz, wolframite, silver, stannite, and base-metal 
sulfides. 

3. Subvolcanic or tin-silver deposits — These are ex- 
emplified by the mineralogically complex deposits of 
Bolivia. Individual mines in such deposits have produced 
enormous amounts of tin, e.g., Bolivia's past producer, the 
Llallagua deposit, which produced over 500,000 mt during 
its life (28). Porphyry tin deposits associated with 
subvolcanic tin lodes contain large amounts of low-grade 
tin. 

4. Disseminated deposits — Small amounts of cas- 
siterite are widely disseminated throughout altered 
granites in these deposits. Although none of these deposits 
has been mined commercially, erosion of such granites has 
resulted in vast, economically important alluvial deposits 
such as those in Southeast Asia (27). 



17 



Table 9. — Varieties of tin minerals (27) 

Formula Location 

Complex tin silicate Namibia. 

Ag 8 GeSn 6 Do. 

^-SnS 2 Do. 

Ag e SnS 6 Bolivia, Tasmania. 

Sn0 2 Worldwide; occurs in most tin deposits. 

Pb3Sn 4 Sb 2 S 14 Do. 

Pb 5 Sn 3 Sb 2 S, 4 Bolivia, Malaysia. 

SnS Bolivia. 

PbSnCynH 2 Do. 

12(Fe,Mg)02Fe 2 3 Sn0 2 3B 2 3 2H 2 United States, Canada. 

CaSnSi0 5 Malaysia, England. 

Cu 44 '5Fei 2 5Sn 1C i'4S 33 Tasmania. 

Sn Australia. 

Complex tin silicate Namibia. 

Ca, Sn(B03) 2 Norway, Namibia. 

Sn 2 S 3 Bolivia. 

Cu, 2 FeSnS 4 Worldwide; occurs in most tin deposits. 

Ca, Sn(Si0 9 )2H 2 United Kingdom. 

PbSnS 2 Bolivia, Malaysia. 

SnTa 2 7 Zaire. 



Mineral 

Arandisite 

Argyrodite 

Berndtite 

Canfieldite 

Cassiterite 

Cylindrite 

Franckeite 

Herzenbergite 

Hochschildite 

Hulsite 

Malayaite 

Mawsonite 

Native tin 

Nigerite 

Nordenskioldine 

Ottemannite 

Stannite 

Stokeite 

Teallite 

Thoreaulith 



5. Contact-metamorphic deposits — These deposits, 
which generally grade less than 0.5 pet Sn, contain many 
important associated minerals: magnetite, garnet, 
fluorite, tourmaline, and sulfide and beryllium minerals. 
The Lost River lode deposit in Alaska is an example of this 
type of occurrence (27, 29). Skarn and tactite are other 
terms for an igneous intrusion that has altered carbo- 
naceous country rock to create a mineralized zone. 

6. Fumerole deposits — These are small but wide- 
spread fracture-fillings in Tertiary laves. Placers derived 
from the erosion of such veins have been mined in 
Argentina, Mexico, and the United States. 

Tungsten, tantalum, copper, lead, zinc, silver, gold, 
indium, ilmenite, fluorine, arsenic, heryllium, antimony, 
bismuth, iron, and some rare-earth elements may be 
genetically associated with lode tin deposits. Some of 
these metals, especially tantalum, are recoverable as 
byproducts from placer tin deposits. Because of the diverse 
mineralogy of many lode tin deposits and the accumula- 
tion of metals in placer tin deposits, associated byproducts 
and coproducts can be expected to play a major role in the 
reserve status of some tin deposits throughout the world. 

SOUTHEAST ASIA 



The four countries evaluated in Southeast Asia 
account for over 22 billion mt of demonstrated tin 
resources, or 95 pet of the MEC's demonstrated resources. 
They have over 80 pet of the recoverable tin evaluated in 
this study. They are located in a tin-rich belt of lode and 
alluvial deposits that extends from Belitung Island in 
Indonesia north to the Mawchi tin district in Burma and 
into China (fig. 7). 

Malaysia 

Malaysia is the world's leading producer of tin. 
Although most of the country's tin is recovered in placer 
operations, one lode deposit (Sungei Lembing) is currently 
producing tin. Malaysia's estimated demonstrated re- 
source of tin ore is over 15 billion mt, or approximately 66 
pet of the evaluated MEC demonstrated resources. Almost 
65 pet of Malaysian resources are in Perak State (fig. 8). 
The average in situ grade for producing tin mines is 



0.0086 pet Sn; the average in situ grade among the 
undeveloped deposits and regions is 0.0080 pet Sn. 

Most of the primary and secondary tin mineralization 
of Malaysia is closely associated with the north-south- 
trending Main Range granite of western Malaysia and a 
similarly trending granite range on the east coast. 
Primary and secondary tin and related minerals are 
derived from these late Carboniferous through Cretaceous 
age granites. Many of the Main Range granites are 
Triassic and are associated with numerous vein swarms, 
pegmatites, and lodes (30). 

The Kinta Valley of Perak State is believed to be the 
world's richest tin field. Current demonstrated resources 
in Perak State are over 30 pet of the demonstrated 
resources in the evaluated MEC's. Both lode and alluvial 
deposits are found in this valley, although only the 
alluvial deposits are mined. The Main Range granite and 
an associated granite range to the west are sources of tin 
in the Devonian age carbonates of the valley. The trough 
and pinnacle topography of the limestone valley and 
associated solution channels have formed a series of 
natural riffles for concentrating heavy minerals. 

Indonesia 

Tin production in Indonesia is primarily from onshore 
and offshore placer deposits at Bangka, Belitung, and 
Singkep Islands (fig. 7). These islands have been intruded 
by gabbroic to granitic rocks. Most primary ore deposits 
are associated with biotite granite. The placers of Bangka 
and Belitung Islands are widespread and extend seaward 
from the present shoreline. The Sanda Shelf had extensive 
drainage systems developed by erosion. Much of the 
deposited placer material has been cemented by iron 
hydroxides forming "kaksa," cassiterite cemented be- 
tween coarse quartz and sandstone fragments. Including 
the Kellapa Kampit underground tin mine, Indonesia has 
over 4.5 billion mt of demonstrated tin resources at an 
average in situ grade of 0.019 pet Sn. 

Thailand 

Geologically, Thailand is composed of several north- 
south-trending granite mountain ranges varying in age 
from pre-Carboniferous through Cretaceous (31). The 
Triassic granites are a source of cassiterite in northern 
and southern Thailand (fig. 7). 



18 



20° 



10° 




LEGEND 



/ Billiton (Belitung) Island, Indonesia 

2 Bangka Island, Indonesia 

J Malaysia 

4 Phuket Island, Thailand 

5 Mawchi area, Burma 



Tin-bearing fields 



500 

i 



1,000 

i 



Scale, km 



Figure 7. — Tin-bearing areas in Southeast Asia. 



19 




200 



LEGEND 
Tin smelter (city and plant) 
| Perak Province 
Tin-bearing fields 



Figure 8. — Tin-bearing areas and major smelter complexes in 
Malaysia. 

Over 97 pet of Thailand's demonstrated recoverable 
tin is contained in placer deposits. These placers are 
derived from the weathering of tin lodes and are mainly 
found along the western side of Thailand adjacent to a 
bordering granitic range. Thailand has a demonstrated 
resource of approximately 2 billion mt with an in situ 
grade of 0.021 pet Sn among producing deposits. 

The main offshore deposits are derived from residual 
tin concentrations rather than transported deposits (31). 
The Bodan dredge operation is located offshore in the 
structural troughs of a series of folds. The coarse granular 
nature of the cassiterite recovered from offshore deposits 
indicates a partial in situ shedding of material from the 
submerged granite ridges (27). 

Hydrothermal lodes and greisens are the most 
common lode deposits. Most tin-bearing quartz veins are 
shallow, extending to depths of 10 to 30 m. Three of the 
evaluated lode deposits of the Yala Province occur on the 
contact of Late Paleozoic sediments and a Cretaceous 
granite. Deposition is almost entirely in the sedimentary 
rocks with minor veining occuring into the granite. 

Minerals associated with cassiterite in the lode 
deposits are wolframite, rhodochrosite, fiuorite, and 
sulfides, of copper, lead, mercury, silver, bismuth, and 
zinc. Tin bearing pegmatites are generally found in all 
granites. Columbium and tantalum minerals and rare- 
earth minerals are often associated with the pegmatites. 

Burma 

The tin deposits of Burma lie along the Thai-Burmese 
border and form the northern extension of the mineralized 



belt that runs through Southeast Asia (fig. 7). Of the MEC 
deposits evaluated, Burma accounts for over 26 million mt 
of demonstrated resources with an estimated in situ grade 
of 0.073 pet Sn. 

The Mawchi tin-tungsten mine consists of veins that 
intersect a tourmalized biotite granite. The veins contain 
cassiterite, wolframite, and scheelite, and, in small 
amounts, galena, arsenopyrite, molybdenite, bismuthi- 
nite, and other sulfide minerals. Although placer deposits 
probably exist throughout this region, the lack of 
flat-lying valleys or washes precludes the accumulation of 
many large alluvial deposits (27). 

OTHER PACIFIC COUNTRIES 

Australia 

Most of the major Australian tin deposits are located 
along the tectonic belt that follows the eastern margin of 
the continent (figure 6, locations 19-22). The north- 
ernmost tin-rich portion of this belt is known as the 
Herberton mining district. Tin deposits are associated 
with biotite granites that have intruded into metamorphic 
and sedimentary rocks (27). 

The Mt. Garnet-Ravenshoe deposit is the largest tin 
producer in the Herberton district. Most of the tin 
produced is from alluvial deposits, although lode deposits 
were worked prior to 1938. The ore deposits occur in four 
mappable zones related to the Upper Paleozoic Elizabeth 
Creek granite. An inner tungsten zone, mainly confined to 
the Elizabeth Creek granite, passes progressively into tin, 
copper, and lead zones. Cassiterite is the main ore mineral 
in the tin zone of the granite. In addition to tin, lodes in 
this district have produced tungsten, copper, silver, and in 
minor amounts, bismuth, antimony, molybdenum, zinc, 
gold, fiuorite, calcite, and mica. The Kangaroo Hill 
province, believed to be metallorgenically associated with 
the Herberton district, produces tin from Quaternary-age 
basal gravels at the Ruxton placer deposit. 

One of the world's largest underground tin mines, 
Renison Mine, is located in western Tasmania (figure 6, 
location 17). Mineralization in this ore body consists of 
fine-grained cassiterite in massive pyrrhotite and occa- 
sional pyrite. "Modern" placers and older "deep leads" 
have also been produced in northern Tasmania (figure 6, 
location 17) (27). 

Tin and tantalum are recovered from the Green- 
bushes Pegmatite in Western Australia (figure 6, location 
16). The main producing ore body is composed of a series of 
discontinuous and structurally complex pegmatite veins. 
The ore body and the country rock, which have been 
regionally metamorphosed to the lower amphibolite 
facies, contain associated columbium and boron (32). 

All but one of the producing tin deposits evaluated in 
Australia are mined from lodes. The producing deposits 
evaluated in Australia contain demonstrated resources of 
260 million mt with an average in situ grade of 0.087 pet 
Sn. Although the in situ grade of the undeveloped deposits 
is much greater, at 0.197 pet Sn (for over 46 million mt of 
demonstrated resources), these deposits have yet to 
undergo any substantial development. 

Japan 

Lode deposits in Japan occur primarily as pegmatites 
and quartz veins associated with biotite granite (figure 6, 
locations 23-24). The veins, which cut both diorite and 



20 



gabbro of the Yakumo complex, are in the late Permian 
age Maizuru Group. The Maizuru Group is composed of 
slate, igneous extrusives, and phyllites. The principal ore 
minerals of the evaluated deposits are cassiterite, stan- 
nite, and stanniferous tetrahedrite. The Akenobe deposit, 
one of the most widely studied high-temperature, low- 
pressure ore deposits in the world, produces copper, zinc, 
gold, and silver, in addition to tin. 

The two evaluated mines, Akenobe and Suzuyama, 
have recoverable resources sufficient for 40 and 20 yr, of 
production, respectively, at current rates. Akenobe pro- 
duces about 350 mt/yr tin-in-concentrate with byproduct 
copper and zinc. Suzuyama mined 8,000 mt of 1.0-pct Sn in 
1983 (33). 



SOUTH AMERICA 
Bolivia 

Currently, most Bolivian tin is mined from lode 
deposits. The lodes lie within the East Andean orogenic 
zone, a belt that extends from Peru through Bolivia and 
into Argentina, a distance of 800 km (figure 6, location 5). 
These subvolcanic-type deposits are associated with thick 
marine Paleozoic sediments intruded by stocks of biotite 
granite, granodiorite, and quartz monzonite. The igneous 
activity ranges in age from Late Triassic through 
Pliocene. In the northern part of the region, erosion has 
exposed the underlying granites, while stocks remain 
unexposed to the south. This relationship has resulted in 
exposure of different zones of ore deposition yielding a 
variety of mineral suites (27, 34). 

Primary mineralization along the orogenic belt occurs 
as quartz-cassiterite-wolframite veins. Several tin associa- 
tions, tin-silver, tin-tungsten, and tin-zinc-silver, as well 
as complex sulfosalts, occur throughout the mineralized 
zones. Other metals persent in the tin zones are lead, gold, 
iron, arsenic, copper, and bismuth (34). 

At the Potosi mines, tin is produced from a dacite 
stock, that contains a tin-rich en echelon vein system. The 
veins are strongly zoned and contain complex tin and 
silver minerals, bismuthinite, and wolframite. At the 
Uncia mine in the Llallagua district, 6 pet Sn was mined 
from some of the veins (27). Very few placer tin deposits 
had been exploited through the late 1960's. 

Only 25 pet of the approximately 248 million mt of 
demonstrated resources evaluated in Bolivia comes from 
producing deposits. The producing underground deposits 
have an average in situ grade of 1.114 pet Sn, which is 
more than 13 times higher than the average in situ grade 
of all demonstrated resources in Bolivia. Of all the 
producing deposits, 75 pet of the recoverable resources is 
from dredging and gravel pump operations. Tin from these 
operations has an average in situ grade of 0.022 pet. 

Over 270 million mt of waste and tailings tin 
resources is estimated to be contained in 22 of the Bolivian 
deposits evaluated. Grades range from a low of 0.02 to 
over 2.0 pet Sn. 

Brazil 

The producing deposits evaluated in Brazil contain an 
estimated 160 million mt of demonstrated resources at an 
average in situ grade of 0.040 pet Sn. Almost 25 pet of this 
resource occurs in nonproducing deposits with an average 
in situ grade of 0.064 pet Sn. 



Brazilian tin is produced from both placer and lode 
deposits (figure 6, locations 3 and 7-9). The granitic source 
rocks intrude metamorphic rocks and older igneous ring 
complexes of the Precambrian Brazilian Shield and Lower 
Paleozoic rocks. Cassiterite, the primary tin mineral, 
occurs within altered and greisenized rocks generally 
within the north-south-trending granites. The potentially 
mineralized area extends into eastern Bolivia (28) (figure 
6, location 3). 

The Rhondonia district, discovered in the early 
1950's, covers almost 200,000 km 2 in the drainage basin of 
the Rio Madeira. Its tin deposits are composed of lodes in 
granites and tin placers. Most lodes consist of cassiterite 
locally associated with wolframite in topaz greisen (27). Of 
lesser importance are tin, columbium-tantalum, beryl- 
lium, and boron mineralized zones associated with 
pegmatitic quartz-rich veins (27). Recent exploration has 
uncovered tin deposits in Goias State in central-eastern 
Brazil which were not evaluated in this study. Additional 
resources from Goias State and other regions which were 
not evaluated, plus increased production, have raised 
Brazil to the level of one of the world's major tin 
producers. 

Argentina 

Argentina's Pirquitas tin mine is developed on 
several veins in metamorphosed shale and sandstone. It is 
at the southernmost tip of the Bolivian tin belt (figure 6, 
location 6). The vein system, which contains individual 
veins grading up to 3.5 pet Sn, consists of cassiterite, 
sphalerite, galena, stannite, pyrargyrite, proustite, 
polybasite, andorite, and marcasite (27). The Pirquitas 
deposit produces about 7,000 mt of ore per month grading 
1.3 pet Sn. Byproduct silver and various base metal 
sulfides are expected to be recovered if this region 
develops more deposits (34). 



Peru 

The San Rafael tin deposit consists of steeply dipping 
mineralized veins within a sequence of extrusive rocks 
(figure 6, location 4). The veins vary in thickness between 
0.3 and 1.5 m. The principal vein minerals, cassiterite and 
chalcopyrite, produce tin and copper. The deposits are 
progressively enriched in tin and depleted in copper with 
depth. 



AFRICA 
Republic of South Africa 

The Republic of South Africa's tin deposits are found 
mainly in or near granites or granophyres of the 
Precambrian Bushveld Complex. These intrusions extend 
for approximately 240 by 140 km with an overall 
east-northeast trend (figure 6, location 13). Mineralization 
occurs in pipeform deposits, fissure veins, vein replace- 
ments, and zones of disseminated cassiterite, in flat, 
sheetlike deposits. The pipes are vertically and horizontal- 
ly zoned and generally terminate on a tourmalized granite 
(35). The main Bushveld granite is a crudely stratiform 
sheet, 2,800 m thick, intruded by stocks of miarolitic 
granite (35). 



21 



The tin-bearing lodes of the Union tin mine region 
form an irregular stockwork along fissures in or near the 
Union Tin Formation, a shale unit located in a thick 
sequence of Rooiberg felsites. Mineralization at the 
Rooiberg mine occurs in a complex series of replacement 
and fracture lodes in a quartzite near the tip of the 
Magaliesberg Formation. The source of the tin for both of 
these deposits was probably the Bush veld granite. 

The deposits evaluated in the Republic of South 
Africa comprise almost 10 million mt of demonstrated 
resources and have an average in situ grade of 0.616 pet 
Sn. 

Zaire 

Tin at the Kivu Mine in Zaire (figure 6, location 11) is 
produced from both alluvial and lode deposits. Lode 
deposits at the Kivu Mine are tin-bearing pegmatites, 
greisens, and quartz veins. Basement rocks in this region 
consist of Precambrian-age quartzites, schists, and gneis- 
ses locally intruded by mafic rocks and a younger biotite 
granite. After injection of the granite, several systems of 
veins and dikes formed in the following sequence: (1) 
aplite-pegmatite, (2) quartz veins containing columbite 
and tantalite, (3) greisen containing columbite-tantalite, 
and (4) greisen containing wolframite and cassiterite (27). 
The tin deposits are genetically related to a biotite 
granite. Wolframite and columbite-tantalite are associ- 
ated with cassiterite. The mineralized areas throughout 
the granite massif are zoned. The zoning allows for 
differential weathering and accumulation of tin and 
associated minerals as placers (27). Approximately 8 
million mt of 0.288-pct-Sn in situ resources has been 
demonstrated at Kivu. 

Nigeria 

Most tin in Nigeria (figure 6, location 10) is produced 
from placer deposits from the Jos Plateau. The plateau is 
intruded by 50 to 60 Jurassic-age ring complexes 
comprised of rhyolite, tuff, agglomerate, explosion breccia, 
syenite, and biotite and riebeckite granite and dikes (35). 
Most of Nigeria's tin deposits are associated with the 
biotite granites. The lode deposits consist principally of 
mineralized stockworks and quartz-topaz mica greisens. 
In addition to cassiterite, the tin lodes contain wolframite, 
columbite, chalcopyrite, bornite, arsenopyrite, sphalerite, 
and molybdenite (27, 35). 

The high-grade placers of the Jos Plateau were 
formed largely as a result of erosion of the basement rocks. 
Rising water levels in streams buried the placers beneath 
clay and alluvium. Subsequent extensive lavas further 
buried the stream gravels. Tin-bearing drainage systems 
formed later on the newer surfaces, revealing these 
ancient placers. Although most current production is from 
modern placers, additional resources exist in the ancient 
deposits (27). Demonstrated in situ resources for the 
Amalgamated tin mine are 147 million mt at 0.015 pet Sn. 

Zimbabwe 

Tin is recovered from pegmatites in a northeast- 
trending schist belt located in the Precambrian orogenic 
shield of southern Zimbabwe. The pegmatites, which are 
primarily produced at the Kamativi Mine (figure 6, 
location 14), contain tin and may contain tantalum, 



columbium, beryllium, and lithium (35). The lithium-poor 
pegmatites are rich in tin and contain recoverable 
amounts of columbite-tantalite. Albitized parts of the 
tin-bearing pegmatites are enriched in columbite- 
tantalite (27). The Precambrian schist system has been 
intruded by biotite granite, but there is no spatial 
relationship between the granite and the tin deposits. The 
estimated demonstated resources at Kamativi are 13 
million mt at an in situ grade of 0.209 pet Sn. 

Namibia 

The two major tin producing mines in Namibia, 
Brandburg West and Uis (figure 6, location 10), contain 
about 53 million mt of ore at an average grade of 0.143 pet 
Sn. The Uis tin mine is situated within a regional graben 
feature bounded by steeply dipping fault planes. It is 
located at the northeastern extremity of a 30- by 125-km 
pegmatite schist belt. There are more than 100 individual 
pegmatite bodies at the mine, some exceeding 30 m in 
thickness. Veins of iron and manganese oxides are often 
found, and in such areas, there is an increase in tantalum 
and columbium values. 



EUROPE: UNITED KINGDOM 

The Cornwall lode deposits (figure 6, location 25) are 
related to several outcropping stocks of biotite granite and 
occur in granite and surrounding altered sediments. 
These late Paleozoic granites trend north-northeast 
intermittantly for about 210 km (35). The fissure-filling 
and replacement mineralization is dominated by cassiter- 
ite and includes quartz, tourmaline, topaz, arsenopyrite, 
wolframite, chalcopyrite, galena, sphalerite, and locally, 
sulfosalt minerals (27). 

Some mines produced principally copper ores, while 
some produced lead-zinc ores, and others produced tin 
(27). The Dalcoath Mine was one of the world's most 
productive lode tin mines. It produced 80,000 mt of tin and 
350,000 mt of copper over its life (29). 

Of the 36 million mt of demonstrated in situ tin 
resources in the deposits evaluated in the United 
Kingdom, only 17 pet occurs in producing deposits. The 
average in situ grade of these producing mines is 0.739 pet 
Sn, while the nonproducing deposits grade about 0.279 pet 
Sn. 

NORTH AMERICA 
Canada 

The East Kemptville tin deposit in Nova Scotia 
(figure 6, location 2) is an example of large tonnage, low 
grade, greissen-hosted mineralization. It is situated in 
granitic rocks of the South Mountain Pluton, immediately 
underlying the metasediments of the Meguma Group. Tin 
mineralization occurs in a stockwork of tin-bearing 
greisen alteration zones. These zones are well developed to 
a depth of about 100 m. Associated with cassiterite in 
these deposits are pyrite, pyrrhotite, sphalerite, chalcopy- 
rite, and some wolframite (37). 

Published resources of 38 million mt grading 0.2 pet Sn 
at a 0.1-pct cutoff grade, have been defined for East 
Kemptville. The mine there was scheduled to go into 
operation at the end of 1985. The mining rate when the 



22 



ultimate pit is constructed is projected to be 21,000 mt/d of 
0.165-pct Sn. The mine plan calls for 17 yr of production, 
about 12 yr of which is expected to be at capacity {39-38). 

United States 

The Climax molybdenum mine in Colorado is the only 
tin producing mine in the conterminous United States; 
however, it was not evaluated since tin is only a minor 
byproduct. The only domestic tin property evaluated for 
this study was the Lost River deposit, Seward Peninsula, 
AK (figure 6, location 1). Tin would be produced as a 
coproduct along with fluorite, tungsten, and beryllium in 
a proposed open pit operation. The bulk of the bedrock in 
the Lost River valley consists of the Ordovician Port 
Clarence limestone. A rhyolitic porphyry dike known as 
the Cassiterite Dike and an unexposed tin granite 



intrude the limestone. The mineralized skarn was 
produced by felsic igneous intrusions followed by greise- 
nization along with contact metamorphism of the intruded 
limestone. The main ore minerals derived from the Lost 
River deposit are cassiterite, fluorite, wolframite, beryl, 
and chrysoberyl. Other metallic minerals associated with 
the tin-tungsten ores include stannite, arsenopyrite, 
pyrite, galena, chalcopyrite, ferroan sphalerite, molybde- 
nite, stibnite, and bismuthinite {39). Estimated demons- 
trated resources for this deposit are 25 million mt at an in 
situ grade of 0.151 pet Sn. 

Demonstrated resources of domestic tin have been 
defined for five other deposits in the United States, all 
located in Alaska. Almost 30 million mt of in situ 
demonstrated resources has been defined for these 
deposits, with over 20,000 mt of recoverable tin. These 
deposits were not included in the evaluation for this study. 



MINE AND BENEFICIATION TECHNOLOGY 



The geologic nature of tin occurrences dictates the 
mining method utilized. Tin is recovered by essentially 
four types of mining methods: dredging, gravel pumping 
(hydraulicking), open pit, and underground. Tin recovered 
from dulong washers accounted for about 5 pet of the total 
tin produced in Malaysia in 1982. "Dulong" is a Malayan 
term for a hardwood pan (resembling a gold pan) used by 
women to concentrate tin from placer deposits. Tin 
produced from dulong washers was not evaluated. Figure 
9 illustrates the distribution of recoverable tin with 
respect to the mining methods evaluated. 



GRAVEL PUMPS 

Gravel pumps have been an important tin mining 
method for at least 70 yr, and more than 30 pet of the 
world's tin is currently recovered using gravel pumps. 
Nearly half of the evaluated recoverable tin resource is 
potentially available from gravel pump operations, most 
of which reside in already-producing operations. Approx- 
imately half of Malaysia's and Indonesia's tin production, 
one-third of Thailand's, and most of Brazil's tin production 
originates from gravel pump operations {40). There are 
over 400 active gravel pump operations in Malaysia. 

Gravel pumps have several advantages over dredging 
methods: (1) topography is relatively unimportant, (2) 
selective mining can be practiced, (3) capital cost is low, 
(4) complete extraction of the material is possible, and (5) 
ground at various depths can be worked with the same 
equipment {41). 

A gravel pump generally consists of three primary 
sections: monitors (high pressure water nozzles), pumping 
stations, and a concentrating section. A simplified flow 
diagram of a gravel pump operation is illustrated in figure 
10. Gravel pump monitors are designed to excavate 
exposed faces of virgin ground, tailings, and previously 
dredged ground, especially around exposed limestone 
pinnacles. Exposed faces can range in thickness from 1 to 
over 60 m. High-pressure water, directed through the 
nozzles of the monitor, serves to break up the tin-bearing 
ground. The monitors are generally placed about 35 m 
from the exposed face. The resulting slurry flows through 
channels to the pumping station. 



Open pit 
8 2 pet 



KEY 

I 1 Producers 
^ Nonproducers 




Total recoverable tin = 2,799,000 mt 

Figure 9.— Distribution of recoverable tin in MEC's by mining 
method. 

The pumping station consists of an excavation or 
sump which is designed to receive the slurry. The sump 
serves to separate driftwood, stones, clay, and other 
undesirable materials from the gravel. The gravel is 
pumped from the bottom of the sump to a trommel. (A 
trommel is a revolving, generally cylindrical screen that 
separates out the oversized material.) The screened 
material is then directed to the palongs, which are long 
(up to 50 or 60 m), inclined sluices lined with riffles. 
Fine-grained material requires a longer palong in order to 
allow time for the fines to settle out. The riffles capture 
fragments of cassiterite as well as other accompanying 
heavy minerals such as zircon, apatite, monazite, and 
rutile. The flow of slurry is periodically stopped so the 
material collected in the riffles can be emptied. The 
collected material (tin concentrate) is then dewatered and 
fed to a jig plant. (A jig is a mechanical device designed to 
utilize gravity for the separation of tin — essentially a box 



23 



Treatment plant 
(palongs) 


MINING ADVANCE 

Dry stripping 
operations 


v .Gravel pump j^^^'X(:M-^<u>^'^^J' 
^>/ water line /vv&^i!y '- ■'£?& 1- ?£-}$ '('\'' '-' 
^^O^s. Grave 1 Monitor £'^y<i-<';~&-^''^ 

'^v^s^^^ pump ^J^^^^l^^ 





Mine face -<- 



Wash 



Gravel pump 



Palongs 



Water 



Tailings 



Sn02 concentrate 



Jigs 



Monitor 



Pump 

Water 
-*► Settling dam 



■*- Tailings 



Sn02 concentrate 



Tin shed 



Figure 10. — Typical gravel pump operation. 



24 



with a screen bottom by which the action of water currents 
agitates the tin concentrate, leaving the most dense 
material at the bottom of the box.) The waste material is 
returned to the mine site to be used as landfill. The 
concentrates are then directed to the tin shed. (See "Tin 
Shed" section.) 

Other than grade, the primary factor in the cost per 
recovered unit of tin is the nature of the ground being 
mined. Sandy clay requires much less energy to break 
than clays. Clays though, are less expensive to process 
than clean sands because the clay content increases the 
density of the water, which produces a more effective 
medium for pumping the tin-bearing material. 



DREDGING 

Thirty pet of the evaluated recoverable tin from the 
deposits evaluated is potentially available from dredging 
operations, and nearly 85 pet of this tin is from producing 
deposits. Onshore dredges have been used to recover tin 
from alluvial deposits since the turn of the century. In 
1984, more than 30 dredges were operating in Malaysia 
(42). A dredge's basic function is to serve as a self- 
contained, floating excavating machine on which is 
mounted a screening and jigging plant. There are 
basically two types of dredges in common use: bucket-line 
dredges and suction dredges. Both types require slight 
modifications to mine offshore. 

The bucket-line dredge (fig. 11), is the most common 
type of dredge. It is an efficient mining machine with a low 
operating cost, owing to its high bucket capacity, speed, 
and its ability to operate for a relatively long time without 
maintenance. The dredge consists of a hull, generally 
constructed of pontoons, upon which is mounted the 
digging mechanism and on-board concentrator plant. 

The digging mechanism on a bucket-line dredge 
consists of a series of buckets connected to a chain 
mounted on a ladderlike structure. As the buckets rotate 
around the ladder in a ferris-wheel-type fashion, material 
is excavated and dropped into a distribution chute. At 
times the dredge is used to remove overburden in order to 
reach the "pay zone." The removal of material ahead of the 
dredge produces a pond for the dredge to advance on. The 
dredge's heading is guided by an on-board cable attached 
to a land anchor. Most dredges are operated by electricity 
(supplied by cable), but in remote areas, diesel-electric 
generators or, more rarely, steam-driven generators are 
used. 

Most modern tin dredges have a capacity ranging 
from 1.5 to nearly 2.5 million mt per month and have an 
average digging depth of about 21 m, with maximum 
depths of up to 50 m. Since the 1930's, the average digging 
depth of dredges has increased from 15 m to nearly 21 m. 
This has resulted from improved design of dredge 
equipment and the need for higher capacities to reduce 
unit costs. Lower unit costs allow dredging of lower grade 
ore. When dredges encounter difficult rhining conditions, 
such as high boulder content or uneven bedrock surfaces, 
dredging may be abandoned and replaced with a gravel 
pump operation. 

Offshore dredges started operating off the coast of 
Thailand in about 1907. The success of the operation 
encouraged the construction and use of offshore dredges in 
Indonesia. Offshore dredges differ from onshore dredges in 
that they are designed to be wave resistant. Despite the 



modification, offshore dredges have difficulty operating 
year round. An attractive aspect of offshore dredging is 
that much of the overburden has been winnowed out by 
wave and tidal action, leaving behind heavier alluvial 
sands and gravels. However, bad weather, tidal currents, 
and wave action cause offshore dredges to mine at 
substantially lower efficiencies than their onshore coun- 
terparts, resulting in higher unit costs. 

Suction dredges are much less common than bucket- 
line dredges. Large suction dredges find their greatest 
application in relatively shallow waters. A suction hose 
surrounded by high-pressure water jets or cutter heads 
delivers material to the surface as the high-pressure 
water or cutters dislodges the material. Among the 
disadvantages of suction dredging is the high amount of 
slimes produced and occasional clogging of the cutters and 
suction pipe by debris. 

Approximately 1,000 privately owned small suction 
boats, which employ a total of about 60,000 people, 
operate in waters offshore from Thailand. The boats 
operate on a seasonal basis, and each recovers only about 
15 kg/d of cassiterite concentrate, but collectively they are 
responsible for a large portion of total Thai tin prouction. 
The operations generally employ a diver who directs the 
suction hose to the pay zone. As in gravel pump 
operations, recovery of tin from gravels and sands on 
dredges is accomplished by utilizing gravity methods (fig. 
11). When the ore is dumped on board, it is delivered to a 
series of screens which serve to remove the larger rocks 
and debris. After screening, the material is sprayed by 
high-pressure hoses to break up clay balls and other 
loosely aggregated material. The material is rescreened, 
and the undersize material is sent to a series of jigs. The 
final tin concentrate generally assays between 20 to 30 pet 
and yields about a 95-pct Sn recovery. The concentrate is 
further processed at a land-based tin shed. 

TIN SHED 

The tin shed is a centrally located treatment plant 
designed to further upgrade tin concentrates recovered 
from alluvial deposits to about 70 to 75 pet Sn (90 to 95 pet 
cassiterite). The plant consists of a relatively simple series 
of gravity methods, including the use of jigs and tables 
(fig. 12). In some cases (especially if the tin shed is owned 
by a large company), a tin shed can be relatively 
complicated (fig. 12), using acid leaching to remove 
carbonates, flotation to remove sulfides (most commonly 
pyrite and arsenopyrite), and magnetic or electrostatic 
methods to remove iron minerals, zircon, ilmenite, 
columbite, and monazite. Some of these minerals have 
economic value but are not generally sold on a regular 
basis. After upgrading, the concentrate is usually dried and 
then shipped to the smelter. 



MINING OF LODE DEPOSITS 

Most tin lode deposits are mined by underground 
methods, although there are a few significant open pit 
operations. Tin potentially available from underground 
mines accounts for about 14 pet of total recoverable tin 
among the evaluated deposits. Of the recoverable tin 
potentially available from underground mines, 92 pet is in 
producing deposits. Open pit mines generally employ 
standard open pit mining practices using power shovels 



25 



Boom support 
structure^ 



MINING ADVANCE 



Distribution chute 
Main drive 
motor 




■.-.■ -.■.:.?■■■-'.;.--'.; -■■■:-.■ 



Bucket feed 



Trommel 



Primary jigs 



Secondary jigs 



Tertiary jigs 



Sea v anger jigs 



Sn0 2 concentrate 

v 
Tin shed 



Overburden chute 
(used when stripping) 

v 
Tailings 



Figure 1 1 .—Typical bucket-line dredge and outboard concentrating plant. 



26 







SIMPLE TIN SHED 

Tin shed feed 

Willoughby washer 

Lanchute 
or sluice boxes 


1 


1 




Salable concentrate 


First tailing 

Second tailing 

Tin shed tailing 

or 

final tailing discharged 







Dredge concentrate 

1 


COMPLEX TIN SHED 
















Concentrate hoppers 






' 


' 


Pyritic ore 


r~ 


Willoughby box 


stockpile 












JWWV^ 


Rod 
mills 


— * 


Flotation 
(batch) 


1 

Pyrites 


To palon 


98 


i i 


i 


/ 


~. /- 


\ 


i r 




Vibrating tables 


— *■ Silica 






\ 


' 




< 


i__ 






/ 






r 

To palon) 


Willoughby box 






* 


' 








Rotary dryers 




s 










i, 


f 


J 


i 
Tailings 




' 


' 






Magnetic separators 


> 


B Tl 


menite 


f 






' 


' 




Middlings 


« T 


Nonmagnetic 
vibrator tables 










1 








] 


f 




— *• 


Palongs 


— »> 


To palonj 


Willoughby box 






I- 


leavies 




18 


i 








Rotary dryer 






Rotary dryer 


Sn02 product bagging 
and shipment 




' 


' 




s » 








High-tension 
separators 




Zircon 




J * 




< 


I 








Magnetic separators 










1 


T T 

Imenite Monazil 


e 



























Figure 1 2.— Flowsheets for typical simple and complex tin shed plants. 



27 



and trucks. These operations represent only 8 pet of the 
total evaluated recoverable tin resources, and producers 
account for about 40 pet of that total. 

Bolivia has more underground tin mines than any 
other country evaluated in this study. Underground mines 
represent virtually all of the country's current tin 
production. The Bolivian mines use high-cost selective 
stoping methods, and achieve poor productivity rates. 

The Cornwall district of England uses combined 
stoping methods but has somewhat higher productivity 
rates than Bolivia because of more mechanization and 
better mine planning. 

One of the world's largest underground tin mines, 
Renison Bell in Australia, uses highly mechanized 
room-and-pillar mining methods and inclined truck 
haulage. Ore production is approximately 850,000 mt/yr. 

Ores associated with lode deposits are mineralogical- 
ly more complex than alluvial deposits. Lode deposits are 



often associated with pyrite, pyrrhotite, arsenopyrite, and 
various silicate minerals. Additional minerals, such as 
wolframite, scheelite, chalcopyrite, galena, sphalerite, 
stibnite, bismuthinite, gold, and sliver, may occur in suf- 
ficient quantities to warrant recovery as a coproduct or 
byproduct. In nearly all cases, gravity methods are used to 
recover the tin. However, a notation circuit may also be 
part of the beneficiation circuit if the ore is complex. As in 
most beneficiation plants, the ore is first crushed. After 
crushing, a high-speed concentrate may be isolated by 
handsorting for direct shipment to a smelter. Handsorting 
is practiced at some mines in Bolivia and Southeast Asia. 
More typically, the ore is sent through a complex series of 
heavy-mineral-separation steps, including jigs, tabling, 
and hydroclassifiers. Depending on the complexity of the 
ore, several grades and compositions of concentrates may 
be produced. 



FUMING, SMELTING, AND REFINING 



Three major postbeneficiation steps are generally 
used to produce marketable tin metal: fuming, smelting, 
or refining. However, the fuming step is not always used. 
Several criteria regarding the tin concentrate chemistry 
are used to select the correct type of processing. Tin grade 
is the most important criterion, but iron and impurity 
content are also considered. 



FUMING OF CONCENTRATES 

Over the past few years, direct fuming of low-grade 
tin concentrates has become an important addition to tin 
smelting technology. Fuming is performed when the tin 
grade is between 5 and 25 pet. Fuming does not require a 
roasting step. The fuming process converts the tin-in- 
concentrate to a gaseous stage, from which a tin oxide dust 
is recovered. COMIBOL (of Bolivia) is considering a loan 
of $400 to $500 million from the Soviet Union for 
construction of a 400-mt/d fuming plant {43). Chemically, 
the tin in cassiterite reacts with sulfur present in pyrite 
and other sulfides) to form stannous sulfide (SnS), which, 
in the presence of air, oxidizes back into a stannous oxide 
(Sn0 2 ), or "fume." The. recovered fume (tin dust) yields a 
45- to 60-pct Sn concentrate. The fume is converted to 
metallic tin in a conventional smelting and refining 
complex. 

Some mining operations, especially in Bolivia, are 
constructing on-site fuming plants. Fuming is especially 
important for Bolivia, where tin in low-grade concentrates 
and tailings may be recoverable by fuming. The tailings 
can be upgraded to a low-grade concentrate that assays 1 
to 3 pet Sn and could be upgraded further by fuming to a 
relatively high-grade tin product. Refining would then 
follow. 

In the smelter, fuming improves tin recovery and, in 
conventional smelting, also eliminate the need for a 
second stage. As shown in the top flowsheet in figure 13, 
the fuming process uses a furnace in which a sulfur 
source, such as pyrite, is added to the molten slag. The 
reaction of the tin (in an oxide phase) with the sulfur 
results in a stannous sulfide gas. The sulfide vapor is then 



burned off in the presence of oxygen to produce a fine 
stannous oxide powder, which is directed to the smelting 
furnace. 

SMELTING 

Conventional smelting of medium-grade tin concen- 
trates (30 to 50 pet Sn) usually includes roasting. Roasting 
is necessary to remove arsenic and sulfur, which are 
contained in arsenopyrite and pyrite. Medium-grade 
concentrates usually originate from lode deposits that 
include large amounts of impurities. Smelting results in 
two products: a crude tin metal which is poured off and 
sent to the refiner and large volumes of slag. 

Losses of tin in slag have replaced stack losses as the 
single largest source of tin loss because methods of 
recovering tin from offgasses during smelting have been 
improved. The large volumes of tin lost in slag have 
promoted research to maximize tin recovery from slags 
using fuming. The addition of a fuming or volatization 
step has improved the recovery of tin. 

Conventional smelting of high-grade tin concentrate 
is generally carried out in two stages (figure 13, bottom 
flowsheet). Smelting can be carried out in reverberatory, 
rotary, or electric smelter furnaces. The choice is 
generally dictated by economic rather than technical 
factors. For example, most Malaysian smelters use 
oil-fired reverberatory or rotary plants rather than 
electric smelters owing to the ready availability of oil. In 
some African countries, electricity is used because of the 
availability of inexpensive hydroelectric power. 

The first smelting step consists of heating a concen- 
trate to the point where it becomes molten. At this point, 
an iron-rich slag and a crude tin metal can be separated. 
The impure tin, which generally assays over 90 pet Sn, is 
directed to the refinery. The iron-rich slag is directed to a 
smelting furnace where higher temperatures and a 
reducing (oxygen-deficient) environment are produced. 
These conditions result in separation of the melt into a 
reject slag and "hardhead," a tin-iron alloy. The hardhead 
is then returned to the initial smelting furnace, and the 
process is repeated. Hardhead usually assays about 60 to 



28 



LOW GRADE 

Concentrates 



Pyrites 



I i 1 



Fuming furnance 



Gas 



Gas cleaning 



Reject slag-« 

Reducing agent 



Oust 



1_± 



JZ 



Fluxes Du8t 



Smelting furnance 



Metal 



Gas cleaning 



Slag 



Refinery 



Refined tin 



Arsenic dross 



MEDIUM GRADE 

Concentrates 



Dross 



I JL 



Dust 



Roasting furnance 



Reducing agent 



1 t V ¥ ¥ 



Gas 



Dust 



Gas cleaning 



Smelting furnance 



Metal 



Refinery 



Fluxes 



Gas 



Dust 



Gas cleaning 



Slag 



Pyrites 



Fuming furnance 



1 T 

Refined tin Reject slag 



Gas 



Gas cleaning 













HIGH 

Conce 


GRADE 

ntrates 

Hardhead 




neaucmg agent 






i ) 


Li 




Dust 


i 


{ 












1 1 


' 


i 


, 


i 


k Dross 




1 


r i 


v 












Smelting furnance 


Gas 


Gas cleaning 
















Met 


al , 


' 


Rich s 


Reducin 
lag 


3 agent 

1 Flu 


<es 




1 


I 








\ 


1 ' 


r 






Refinery 




Smelting furnance 


Gas 








\ 


i 


ed 




\ 
ijec 


i 


i 








\ 
Refin 


tin 
















Re 


r 

t slag 









Figure 13.— Typical smelter flowsheets for low-, medium-, and high-grade tin concentrates. 



29 



70 pet Sn and 25 to 40 pet Fe. The discarded reject slag 
assays only 0.5 to 0.8 pet Sn and 8 to 12 pet Fe. 



REFINING 

Tin produced from the smelting of tin concentrates 
contains minor amounts of impurities, most importantly, 
iron, lead, copper, bismuth, arsenic, antimony, cobalt, 
nickel, zinc, and cadmium. In order to attain a purity of 
99.8 pet Sn, virtually all of the impurities must be 
removed by the refining process. The refining of tin is 
performed by either pyrometallurgical or by electrolytic 
processes. 

Pyrometallurgy 

Pyrometallurgical treatment, the more common of 
the two primary methods, generally consists of one of two 
processes: liquation or boiling. In some cases, both 
methods may be used. 

To remove iron, either process can be used. In 
liquation, the impure tin is heated to just above tin's 
melting point (232° C). At this temperature, an iron-tin 
phase remains as a solid when the relatively pure tin is 
poured off. The remaining iron-tin material (dross), is 
returned to the smelter complex. This step is repeated 
until separation of the solids is nearly complete. At some 
refineries, a centrifuge is used to concentrate the iron into 
an isolated crystalline phase containing some tin. The 
iron-rich solids are also returned to the smelter, where 
heating (to 237° C) causes the tin to melt. Air is blown 
through the molten material, which has the effect of 
forming an iron-rich scum on the surface. The recovered 
scum is then liquated. 

Copper is relatively simple to remove from molten tin. 
The process involves the addition of sulfur to the tin 
mixture. Since copper has a higher affinity for sulfur than 
it has for tin, the resulting copper sulfide (which is less 
dense than molten tin) can be removed as a scum from the 
surface of the melt. 

Arsenic, antimony, nickel, cobalt, plus any residual 
copper or iron, can be removed through the addition of 
aluminum. The resulting aluminum complexes can also 
be removed as a scum. 

Lead is generally present in tin in relatively small 
quantities and can be removed from the tin melt through 
the addition of chlorine. The resulting reaction forms lead 
chloride, which is also removed as a scum. 

Bismuth is usually eliminated in the roasting steps; 
however, if bismuth remains in significant amounts, it can 
be removed by using sodium or calcium in conjunction 
with magnesium to form scum. 

Vacuum distillation is a relatively new development 
in pyrometallurgical tin refining. The process requires 
that molten tin be contained in a vessel of dense graphite 
at high temperatures (1,100 to 1,300° C) and subjected to a 
vacuum. Using this process, impurities can be selectively 
distilled by application of specific temperatures and 
lengths of time. The vacuum distillation process is likely 
to replace some electrolytic plants. 



Electrolytic Refining 



Removal of impurities can also be accomplished by 
electrolytic refining. Electrolytic refining is generally 
classified into two general types, using either acid or 
alkaline electrolytes. 

Both processes consist of immersing impure tin 
anodes and pure tin cathodes in a bath of electrolytes. The 
passage of a direct electric current through the tank or cell 
causes the anode tin to dissolve and deposit on the 
cathode. Anode impurities must be removed from time to 
time to maintain the effectiveness of the electrolyte. A 
major disadvantage in electrorefining is the large amount 
of tin that is locked up in the electrolytes (25 to 50 mt) for 
every metric ton of recovered tin. 



BYPRODUCTS OF TIN SMELTING AND REFINING 

The smelting and refining processes are capable of 
isolating several salable byproducts. Some facilities in 
Bolivia, Malaysia, the United Kingdom, and the United 
States recover lead, bismuth, antimony, copper, and 
tungsten. An important byproduct of tin processing is 
tantalum, either contained in slag or as a pentoxide. 
Tantalum-rich slags are produced in Australia, Indonesia, 
Malaysia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Singapore, Thailand, Zaire, 
and Zimbabwe. The slag is sold to companies that recover 
the tantalum for use in steel alloys. No credit is paid to the 
mines for the tantalum content in concentrate, owing to 
its low assay levels; also, nearly all of the tantalum is 
recovered from the smelter slag. Therefore, although the 
tin industry is an important source of tantalum to the 
industrial world, tantalum does not make any significant 
contribution to the success or failure of the tin industry. 

The largest known established resources of tantalum 
are located in Thailand and are based mostly on tantalum 
potentially recoverable from tin slags, which assay up to 
15 pet tantalum pentoxide (Ta 2 5 ). Tantalum from tin 
slags in Thailand may account for as much as 30 pet of 
total world tantalum production (44). Based on evaluated 
tin-tantalum resources in Thailand, approximately 5 
million lb of tantalum is potentially recoverable from 
slags. This does not include tantalum contained in slag 
dumps. A West German firm has agreed to provide 
Thailand with the technology to construct a plant for 
processing tantalum-bearing tin slag. The plant was 
scheduled for production in 1986 and was expected to cost 
about U.S.$ 90 million (45). The planned capacity is about 
1 million lb of tantalum pentoxide, with production to be 
derived from Thai as well as Malaysian tin slags. 

Malaysia has also shown an active interest in the 
recovery of tantalum from slags. Over 1 million mt of 
potentially recoverable tantalum exists in the evaluated 
resource; however, tin slags in Malaysia have significant- 
ly lower assays than Thailand. The high-grade slags assay 
less than 8 pet tantalum pentoxide (46). 



30 



OPERATING AND CAPITAL COSTS 



Operating costs (in January 1984 U.S. dollars) and 
associated capital costs were estimated for each deposit or 
mining region evaluated in this study. Cost data were 
gathered during site visits, through contacts with company 
officials, and from published materials. Where unavail- 
able, capital and operating costs were estimated by 
standard costing techniques. Costs were either calculated 
or determined for mining, milling, smelting, refining, 
transportation (f.o.b. refinery), taxes, and royalties. 

Capital costs for undeveloped deposits reflect the total 
investment required to develop a deposit and bring it into 
production. These costs include acquisition, exploration, 
development, mine and mill plant, equipment costs, and 
infrastructure. Capital costs for most producing deposits 
and regions are not presented because they have been in 
existence for so long that initial investments have been 
depreciated. 

All costs and investments were aggregated by 
country, mining method, and mining status, in order to 
determine their relative importance in the MEC tin 
industry. The operating costs presented are weighted 
averages calculated over the life of the deposit or region. 



OPERATING COSTS 

Operating costs include labor, materials, energy, 
administration, and transportation. All estimated costs 
are presented in dollars per metric ton of ore ($/mt ore) for 
mining and beneficiation and dollars per pound of refined 
tin ($/lb Sn) for mining and beneficiation plus the other 
companies that contribute to total operating costs. 
Operating costs are presented in tabular form in the 
following sections of this report. These costs are aggre- 
gated by producing and undeveloped operations and by 
four specific mining methods: gravel pump, dredge, 
underground, and open pit 8 . Individual deposit costs vary 
depending on the size of an operation, mining method, 
deposit location, grade and characteristics of the ore body, 
byproducts, and country tax structure. 

Costs Aggregated by Producing and 
Undeveloped Deposits and Regions 

Of the 146 operations evaluated, 130 were in 
production at the time of this study. The estimated costs 
for these operations were aggregated for producing and 
undeveloped operations and are shown in table 10. Costs 
for producing operations are disaggregated by country; 
undeveloped operations were not disaggregated owing to 
their small number. 

The weighted-average mining and beneficiation cost 
for producing tin mines was $1.10/mt ore. This cost 
encompassed almost 1.1 billion mt of average annual ore 
capacity (based on the 1984 estimated average capacities 
of the deposits and regions evaluated) at a weighted- 
average grade of 0.015 pet Sn. Almost 80 pet of the 
recoverable tin metal among evaluated producing deposits 
is recovered from gravel pump and dredge operations. 



These operations produce tin from low-grade deposits such 
as those in Malaysia's Perak State, where dredged 
deposits average 0.008 pet Sn. Over 90 pet of the total 
average annual capacity was from Malaysia, Thailand, 
and Indonesia. The weighted-average mining and bene- 
ficiation costs estimated for producing deposits in these 
three countries was the lowest in the study, at $1.30/mt 
ore or less. 

The highest weighted-average mining and beneficia- 
tion cost estimated for producing mines was $47.50/mt ore 
for the high-grade (0.722 pet Sn) underground mines of 
the United Kingdom. Weighted-average mining and be- 
neficiation costs for South African and Bolivian tin mines 
were also high, at $28.50 and $11.40/mt ore, respectively. 
Most of the relatively high-grade producing tin deposits in 
these two countries (with average grades of 0.586 and 
0.245 pet Sn, respectively) are mined by underground 
methods. 

The average estimated potential mining and bene- 
ficiation cost among the 16 undeveloped deposits and 
regions was $1.80/mt ore at a weighted-average grade of 
0.029 pet Sn. This value was weighted heavily by 
Malaysia's Kuala Langat deposit, which was scheduled to 
go on-line in the mid- to late 1980's. When this multiple 
dredge operation reaches its projected full capacity in the 
1990's, it is expected that it will be the largest tin 
producer in Malaysia. 

Mining and beneficiation costs and the remaining 
costs that contribute to an operation's total production 
cost are discussed in the following text and presented in 
table 11. These costs are presented in dollars per pound of 
refined tin ($/lb Sn) in order to demonstrate the effect of 
grade on total operating costs. The tin price was $5.69/lb 
in January 1984. 

Table 10.— Estimated average feed grade and mining and 
beneficiation costs for producing and undeveloped deposits 1 



^To maintain the proprietary nature of certain data, several deposits 
were aggregated in "Others" entries in the tables and are not specifically 
identified in the text. 



Status and Number Avfeed Cost, $/mt ore 

country of mines grade> pct Sn 2 _^ _- ___ 

' or deposits Mining Beneficiation Total 

Producing mines: 

Australia 7 0.072 4.10 2.90 7.00 

Bolivia 27 .245 8.40 3.00 1140 

Brazil 13 .040 1.50 .60 2 10 

Indonesia 7 .019 .70 .50 1.20 

Malaysia 34 009 70 .10 .80 

South Africa, 

Republic of 3 586 15.80 12.70 28.50 

Thailand 25 .021 .80 .50 1.30 

United Kingdom 4 .702 32.60 14.90 47.50 

Others: 
Namibia, 
Nigeria, 
Zaire, and 

Zimbabwe 4 .058 2.30 1.20 3.50 

Argentina, 
Burma, 
Japan, and 
Pe>u 6 .218 7.30 2.30 9.60 

Total or 
weight- 
ed av. 130 015 .80 .30 1.10 
Undeveloped 
deposits 3 16 .029 1_00 .80 1 80 

Grand total or 
weighted av 146 .016 80 40 1.20 

1 Based on 1982 data. Costs were updated tin Jan 1984 U.S. dollars 

2 Rounded to 3 significant figures. 

3 Includes properties in the United States, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, 
Malaysia, Namibia, and the United Kingdom. 



31 



Table 11. — Estimated operating costs and byproduct credits for producing and undeveloped deposits, dollars per pound of 

refined tin 1 



Status and Number of ^L Byproduct Net Total costs 

- rtlmtr ,, mines or Smelter- rredite rost 5 

country deposits Mining Beneficiation refinery 2 Taxes 3 Total 4 O-pct DCFROR 15-pctDCFROR 

Producing mines: 

Australia 7 3.50 2.50 60 0.10 6.80 1.20 5.60 6.10 7.20 

Bolivia 27 2.50 .90 1.20 1.60 6.10 1.10 5.00 5.50 6.20 

Brazil 13 1.70 .70 .20 .70 3.40 3.40 4.00 4.50 

Indonesia 7 1.90 1.30 .20 .20 3.60 3.60 4.20 4.80 

Malaysia 34 4.30 .80 .10 .10 5.30 5.30 5.50 6.00 

South Africa, Republic of 3 2.30 1.90 .10 6 4.30 6 4.30 4.60 5.40 

Thailand 25 2.50 1.50 .10 1.80 6.00 .10 5.90 6.20 6.80 

United Kingdom 4 2.50 1.10 1.00 .20 4.80 1.20 3.70 4.50 5.70 

Other: 
Namibia, Nigeria, 

Zaire, and 

Zimbabwe 4 2.30 1.20 30 .10 4.00 .20 3.80 4.40 5.00 

Argentina, Burma, 

Japan, and Peru .. . 6 1.90 .60 2.40 .10 5.10 2.30 2.80 3.30 3.90 

Total or weighted 

av 130 3.00 1.20 .30 .40 4.90 .20 4.70 5.10 5.70 

Undeveloped deposits 7 . . 16 2^30 1^0 ^0 .40 5.50 1.20 4.30 6JX) 10.50 

Grand total or 
weighted av.. 146 2.90 1.30 .40 .40 5.00 .30 4.60 5.20 6.20 

1 Based on 1982 data. Costs were updated to 1984 U.S. dollars. 

2 Includes all transportation costs fob. refinery. 

3 Includes Federal, State, property, and severance taxes plus royalties. 

4 Summation of mine, mill, and smelter-refinery costs and taxes. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 

5 Total cost minus byproduct credit. 

6 Rounding to the nearest $0.10 makes this value appear as 0. 

7 Includes properties in the United States, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Malaysia, Namibia, and United Kingdom. 



The average mining and beneficiation cost among 
producing deposits was $4.20/lb of refined tin. Although 
Indonesia and Malaysia had the two lowest mining and 
beneficiation costs on a per-metric-ton basis, Brazil's cost 
and the combined costs of Argentina, Burma, Japan, and 
Peru were the lowest per pound of tin. Brazil's costs are low 
because it produces tin from relatively high-grade gravel 
pump and dredge operations. Brazil's feed grade in these 
operations ranges from two to five times higher than 
average feed grades for similar gravel pump operations in 
Southeast Asia. Mining and beneficiation costs in Argen- 
tina, Burma, Japan, and Peru are associated primarily 
with underground mines; the aggregated cost was 
weighted heavily by Peru's high-grade San Rafael Mine 
and Japan's Akenobe Mine. 

Australia had the highest mining and beneficiation 
cost per pound of refined tin. The low feed grade and high 
capacity of the Mt. Garnet-Ravenshoe dredging operation 
and the relatively low feed grade and associated high costs 
of the Renison underground mine weigh heavily in the 
aggregated mining and beneficiation costs for Australia. 
These two deposits have a combined recoverable tin metal 
content of over 9,900 mt/yr. 

The average cost among producing mines for smelting 
and refining tin concentrates was $0.30/lb Sn. The 
highest smelter-refinery cost, $2.40/lb Sn, was the 
aggregated cost for concentrates from Argentina, Burma, 
Japan, and Peru. This cost was offset by a $2.30/lb-Sn 
average byproduct credit. Like the average mining and 
beneficiation cost, the average smelter-refinery cost and 
byproduct credit were weighted heavily by Peru and 
Japan's underground tin mines, which accounted for over 
90 pet of the recoverable tin in these four countries. The 
smelter-refinery cost for Argentina, Burma, Japan, and 
Peru was higher than the average because of penalties 
from impurities associated with lode deposits and relative- 
ly high transportation costs. Byproduct credits were 
generated from tin production in Bolivia ($1.10/lb) and the 
United Kingdom and Australia ($1.20/lb), and these 



credits helped offset high production costs in these coun- 
tries. 

Smelter-refinery costs for Bolivia and the United 
Kingdom were also high. Bolivian law requires that most 
Bolivian concentrates must be treated at Government-run 
smelter-refinery complexes. These complexes have treat- 
ment charges almost five times higher than those charged 
by the Southeast Asian smelters and refineries. Similar 
charges exist at Capper Pass, where the United King- 
dom's concentrates are treated. Additional costs are 
incurred for the smelting and refining of byproduct zinc 
and copper produced from some of the United Kingdom's 
tin deposits. 

Bolivia and Thailand had the highest estimated 
taxes, at $1.60 and $1.80/lb of refined tin, respectively. 
Bolivian mines paid royalties to the government on all 
revenues received from the sale of concentrate to the 
state-owned smelter after a deduction (determined by the 
Government) of about $3.80/lb Sn for mining costs. The 
royalty was 53 pet of the gross revenues after the 
allowable operating cost deduction. In addition, there was 
a 1.1 -pet tax on the value of the concentrates (f.o.b. mine) 
for state-funded mining research and development. In 
Thailand, all tin companies registered on the Thai stock 
exchange were levied a 40-pct income tax (except for two 
that paid a 30-pct income tax). They also paid royalties of 
30 pet, based on the Penang price of tin metal credited at 
the smelter. In contrast, Malaysian mines paid no 
severance taxes or royalties, but paid an effective income 
tax of 50 pet; however, Malaysia imposed a sliding-scale 
export tax on tin which increased as the Penang price 
increased. Indonesia had no severance taxes, but levied a 
royalty of $210/mt of contained tin in concentrate. The 
cost in dollars per pound of refined tin varies, depending 
on mill concentrate grades and smelter-refinery re- 
coveries. 

The estimated weighted-average total cost among 
producing mines (at a 0-pct DCFROR), including all 
operating costs, taxes, byproduct credits, and recovery of 



32 



capital, was $5.10/lb Sn. The highest cost mines were in 
Thailand and Australia, where costs were over $6.00/lb 
Sn; while Brazil's and the combined weighted-average 
cost for Argentina, Peru, Japan, and Burma were the 
lowest, at $4.00/lb Sn or less. Total costs at a 15-pct 
DCFROR among producing mines were $5.70/lb Sn. 

The estimated mining and beneficiation cost for the 
16 undeveloped deposits evaluated was about $4.20/lb of 
refined tin, which was equal to the cost for producing 
mines. Projected smelter-refinery costs among unde- 
veloped deposits, at $0.90/lb, were three times greater 
than producers' smelter-refinery costs. This is because 
costs for producing operations were weighted heavily by 
alluvial deposit operations, whereas costs for unde- 
veloped operations included many lode deposits, which 
have more associated impurities and byproducts that are 
removed at the smelter. Many of the undeveloped deposits 
could recover byproducts with credits estimated at 
$1.20/lb Sn, approximately $1.00/lb higher than the 
average credit for producing mines. This credit brought 
the weighted-average total cost (at a 0-pct DCFROR) for 
undeveloped deposits to $6.00/lb Sn, or $0.90/lb higher 
than for producing deposits. At a 15-pct DCFROR, the 
total cost for undeveloped operations was $10. 5071b Sn, or 
$4.80/lb higher than for producing mines. This value 
($10.50/lb) represents the tin price that would be required 
to generate revenues to provide a 15-pct DCFROR on 
investments for the undeveloped operations. Such a high 
total cost indicates the very large capital outlays projected 
to develop these operations and bring them into produc- 
tion. Among the undeveloped operations evaluated, the 
East Kemptville deposit in Canada and the Kuala Langat 
operation in Malaysia are the most likely to begin 
producing within the next few years. 



Costs Aggregated by Mining Method 

All producing deposits were aggregated by mining 
method with weighted-average operating costs deter- 
mined for each method. Costs for gravel pump, dredge, 
underground, and open pit operations are presented in 
tabular form and discussed in the following sections. 

Mining and beneficiation costs were combined for 
gravel pump and dredge operations. Since most of these 
operations are vertically integrated through the beneficia- 
tion stage, a breakdown in costs between mining and 
beneficiation was not performed. Underground and open 
pit mining and beneficiation costs were isolated within 
each operation and are discussed separately. 

Gravel Pumps 

Almost 1.3 million mt of refined tin metal was 
estimated to be recoverable from the producing tin gravel 
pump operations evaluated in this study. This amounted 
to over 50 pet of the recoverable tin available from all 
producing deposits. At the time of this analysis, 37 
producing gravel pump operations were evaluated in 8 
countries. Average gravel pump costs are largely in- 
fluenced by the tin production of Perak State, Malaysia. 
At the time of this study, these operations accounted for 
almost 40 pet of the recoverable tin metal among 
producing gravel pump operations and over 20 pet of the 
recoverable tin metal from the evaluated producing 
mines. 



The average mining and beneficiation cost was 
$1.10/mt ore at a weighted-average feed grade of 0.012 pet 
Sn (table 12). Mining and beneficiation costs ranged from 
$0.90/mt in the very low-grade Malaysian deposits to 
$4.70/mt in the high-grade deposits of Australia, Bolivia, 
Burma, and Zaire (table 12, "Others" entry under "Gravel 
pump"). 

Direct costs are generally about 70 pet of total mining 
and beneficiation costs. Power constitutes the largest 
percentage of direct costs in gravel pump operations. In 
Southeast Asia, power comprises about 40 pet of the direct 
operating costs, with labor constituting about 25 pet. The 
remaining 35 pet is accounted for by materials and 
miscellaneous costs. High electricity costs for pumping 
water and gravel, relative to fuel costs for tractors and 
bulldozers, has brought about a greater reliance on 
mechanized stripping methods over the traditional moni- 
tor-and-gravel-pump methods of stripping. 

The second-largest source of tin in Malaysia is from 
the Selangor State gravel pump operations with over 
140,000 mt of recoverable tin, or almost 15 pet of the 
recoverable tin estimated for Malaysia. Annual capacity 
from Selangor State gravel pumps is over 90 million mt 
ore. In 1978, the total labor force employed in gravel pump 
mining in Selangor State was 6,032 out of a countrywide 
total of 26,795 laborers in tin mining. Labor accounted for 
almost 30 pet of the mining and beneficiation cost or 
approximately $0.30/mt ore, for the State's gravel pump 
operations. 

The average mining and beneficiation cost per pound 
of refined tin for gravel pumps was about $5/lb Sn, with 
Brazil having the lowest cost, $2.50/lb Sn, owing to its 
higher grade placer deposits. With an average tin feed 
grade of 0.009 pet Sn, Malaysia has the lowest feed grade 
of any of the evaluated countries producing tin by 
gravel-pump methods and the highest mining and 
beneficiation cost on a per-pound-of-tin basis, at $5.40. In 
Australia, Bolivia, Burma, and Zaire (table 13, "Others" 
entry under "Gravel pump"), the average tin feed grade is 
the highest among all gravel pump operations evaluated, 
and the mining and benficiation cost is one of the lower 
costs, at $3.50/lb Sn. 

The only byproduct credits associated with gravel 
pumps evaluated in this study were from the Northern 
Region gravel pumps of Thailand, where tungsten yielded 
a credit of $0.20/lb. Although byproduct tantalum is also 
recovered with tin in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand, 
smelter contracts do not generally provide credit for 
byproducts. Assays are rarely performed for anything 
other than tin and selected impurities. 

The total cost at a 0-pct DCFROR for all producing 
gravel pumps was about $5.70/lb Sn (table 13). The highest 
cost operations were in Thailand, at $7.20/lb Sn. Thai- 
land's total cost was higher, relative to the other 
countries' total cost, because of a large tax burden. At 
$2/lb of refined tin, Thailand's average tax was almost 15 
times higher than the average tax imposed on other 
Southeast Asian countries. Brazil's cost of $4/lb Sn was 
the lowest of any country evaluated in this study. The 
largest portion of total costs (at 0-pct DCFROR) was in 
mining and beneficiation. 

Dredges 

Dredging accounts for almost 30 pet of the recoverable 
tin resources in producing MEC deposits. It was the lowest 
cost tin mining method evaluated in this study and had an 



33 



Table 12. — Estimated capacities, feed grade, and mining and beneficiation costs for producing mines, by mining method 1 

Total ore Av feed Cost, $/mt ore 

Mining method capacity 2 grade, 

and country 10 6 mt pet Sn 3 Mining Beneficiation 

Underground: 

Bolivia 18.0 0.804 $28.60 $10.40 

South Africa, Republic of 9.4 .586 15.80 12.70 

United Kingdom 6.7 .702 32.60 14.90 

Southeast Asia: Burma, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand ... 5.6 1.080 38.00 12.60 

Others: Argentina, Australia, Japan, Peru, and Zimbabwe 34.0 .622 19.80 12.40 

Total or weighted av 73.7 .704 24.00 12.10 

Open pit: 

Australia 47.5 .059 1 1 .60 6.30 

Thailand 3.8 .541 8.80 3.20 

Others: Brazil, Malaysia, and Namibia 61.4 .133 4.40 3.10 

Total or weighted av 112.7 .116 7.80 4.50 

Dredge: 

Indonesia 2,603.0 .01 5 1 .00 ( 4 ) 

Malaysia 2,669.0 .007 .50 ( 4 ) 

Thailand 939.0 .01 2 .80 ( 4 ) 

Others: Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, and Nigeria 407 3 .012 1.10 ( 4 ) 

Total or weighted av 6,619.2 .012 70 

Gravel pump: 

Brazil 85.5 .041 2.30 ( 4 ) 

Indonesia 1 ,298.9 023 1 .70 ( 4 ) 

Malaysia 10,873.4 .009 .90 . ( 4 ) 

Thailand 886.6 .020 1.70 ( 4 ) 

Others: Australia, Bolivia, Burma, and Zaire 52 8 .078 4.70 ( 4 ) 

Total or weighted av 13,197.2 .012 1.10 ( 4 ) 

1 Based on 1982 data. Costs were updated to Jan. 1984 U.S. dollars 

2 Estimated, based on production over the life of each deposit. 

3 Rounded to 3 significant figures. 

4 Mining and beneficiation costs are combined in the mining cost column because most dredge and gravel pump operations were vertically integrated through the 
beneficiation stage. 



annual capacity of over 480,000 mt ore. Operating costs 
for dredges vary from site to site due to the characteristics 
of the ore body and the depth and type of overburden. 
Offshore dredging costs are slightly higher. Although 
offshore overburden has generally been removed by the 
action of waves and currents, the ore-rich zone may also be 
reduced, thereby reducing the throughput of dredged 
material (47). 

Due to prolonged monsoon seasons, offshore dredges 
operate only about 9 months out of the year. The delays 
inherent in such an operation cause the overall efficiency 
to drop and operating costs to rise. 

Mining and beneficiation costs per metric ton of ore 
averaged $0.70/mt for dredging operations (table 12). 
Mining and beneficiation costs per pound of refined tin 
averaged about $3.10/lb Sn, or about $1.90/lb less than for 
gravel pump operations (table 13). Australia, Bolivia, 
Brazil, Nigeria, and Malaysia had the highest mine and 
beneficiation costs, at $4.50 and $4.10/lb ore, respectively, 
while Thailand and Indonesia had the lowest costs, at 
$2.90 and $3.10/lb ore, respectively. 

Indonesian deposits contained the largest amount of 
recoverable tin metal among all the MEC dredge 
operations evaluated — over 365,000 mt of refined tin 
metal at an annual capacity of 12,000 mt ore. Indonesia's 
P.T. Tambang Timah is the largest integrated tin 
producer in the world, accounting for over 20 pet of the 
world's estimated recoverable tin metal. The total cost (at 
a 0-pct DCFROR) for dredges in Indonesia was about 
$4.10/lb Sn. 

In Malaysia, dredges had the largest per unit output 
of any of the mining methods used. In 1979, the average 
output per dredge was 369 mt Sn, compared to 44 mt for 
gravel pumps, 136 mt for open pit mines, and 58 mt for 
underground mines. Berjuntai Tin Dredging Sdn Berhad, 



Malaysia, is one of the largest alluvial mining companies 
in the world (48) and also one of the lowest cost tin 
producers evaluated, containing at the time of the study 
over 26,000 mt of recoverable tin metal at a mining and 
beneficiation cost of about $0.40/mt ore. The average 
breakdown of mining and beneficiation costs for Malay- 
sian dredges was 88 pet for dredging and 12 pet for the tin 
shed. About 74 pet of the dredging cost pertained to the 
actual mining and 26 pet to the onboard beneficiation. 

The average dredge operation can produce tin metal 
at a total cost (at a 0-pct DCFROR) of about $4.20/lb. Of 
the 41 producing dredge operations evaluated in 7 MEC's, 
Malaysia's dredges had the lowest weighted-average total 
cost, at $3.50/lb Sn. The weighted-average cost for 
Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, and Nigeria (table 13, "Others" 
entry under "Dredges") were the highest at $5.70/lb Sn. 
Thailand's large tax burden relative to the other 
Southeast Asian dredge operations resulted in a high total 
cost of $5.00/lb Sn. 

Underground Mines 

Underground mining methods and operating costs are 
dependant on the depth, size, type, and geometry of the ore 
body. Unlike surface mining operations which produce tin 
primarily from relatively unconsolidated and easily 
accessible placer deposits, underground mines require 
shaft sinking, drifting, and roof support, which are 
generally labor-intensive procedures. Therefore, under- 
ground mining has the highest mining and beneficiation 
costs per metric ton of ore of all the tin mining methods. 

Among the 42 producing MEC underground mines 
evaluated, the weighted-average mining and beneficiation 
cost was about $36.10/mt ore; however, the average tin 
grade from underground mines was much higher than all 



34 



Table 13. — Estimated production costs and byproduct credits for producing mines, by mining method, dollars per pound of 

refined tin 1 



Total av Cost 

Mining method Number capacity, 

and country of mines 10 3 mt/yrof Smelter- 

refined tin Mining Beneficiation refinery 2 Taxes 3 Total 4 

Underground: 

Bolivia 24 14.0 2.60 0.90 1 .20 1 .60 6.40 

South Africa, 

Republic of 3 2.0 2.30 1.90 .10 4.30 

United Kingdom 4 6.0 2.50 1.10 1.00 .20 4.80 

Southeast 

Asia: Burma, 

Indonesia, 

Malaysia, and 

Thailand 4 3.0 1.90 .60 .50 .30 3.30 

Others: Argentina, 

Australia, Japan, 

Peru, and 

Zimbabwe 

Total or weighted 
av 

Open pit: 

Australia 3 2.0 10.60 5.80 .60 .10 17.00 

Thailand 4 .5 2.40 .90 .30 1.40 4.90 

Others: Brazil, 
Malaysia, and 
Namibia 3 2.0 2.00 1.40 10 3.50 

Total or weighted 

av 10 4.5 4.30 2.50 .30 .20 7.20 

Dredge: 

Indonesia 3 12.0 3.10 ( 6 ) .20 20 3.50 

Malaysia 22 15.0 3.10 ( 6 ) .10 .10 3.40 

Thailand 10 12.0 2.90 ( 6 ) .10 1.60 4.60 

Others: Australia, 
Bolivia, Brazil, 
and Nigeria .... 

Total or weighted 
av 

Gravel pump: 

Brazil 10 6.0 2.50 ( 6 ) .20 .70 3.50 

Indonesia 3 11.9 3.60 ( 6 ) .20 .10 3.90 

Malaysia 10 31.0 5.40 ( 6 ) .10 .10 5.60 

Thailand 10 17 5.10 ( 6 ) .10 2.00 7.20 

Others: Australia, 
Bolivia, Burma, 
and Zaire 4 3.0 3.50 ( 6 ) .30 .30 4.00 

Total or weighted 

av 37 68.9 5.00 ( 6 ) 10 40 5.40 

1 Based on 1982 data. Costs were updated to Jan. 1984 dollars. 

2 Includes all transportation costs fob. refinery. 

3 Includes Federal, State, property, and severance taxes plus royalties. 

4 Summation of mine, mill, and smelter-refinery costs and taxes. Data may not add to totals shown 

5 Total cost minus byproduct revenues. 

8 Mining and beneficiation costs are combined in the mining costs column because most dredge and 
the beneficiation stage. 



Byproduct Net 
credits costs 5 



Total costs 



0-pct DCFROR 1 5-pct DCFROR 



1.20 




1.20 



.10 



5.20 



4.30 
3.70 



3.20 



5.70 

4.60 
4.50 



5.10 



690 
.20 



10.10 
4.70 



350 



11.40 
5.20 



3.80 



1.90 



5.30 



5.90 



4.00 



4.80 



.02 



5.40 



5.70 



6.40 

5.40 
5.70 



5.90 



7 


13.0 


2.00 


1.20 


1.30 


.20 


460 


90 


3.70 


4.20 


4.90 


42 


38.0 


2.20 


1.10 


1.00 


.50 


4.90 


.80 


4.10 


4.80 


5.50 



15.10 
5.60 



4.10 



7.00 






3.50 


4.10 


4.90 





3.40 


3.50 


3.90 





4.60 


5.00 


5.80 



6 


4.0 


4.50 


( 6 ) 


.30 


.30 


5.20 





5.20 


5.70 


5.70 


41 


43.0 


3.10 


( 6 ) 


.20 


.40 


3.80 





3.80 


4.20 


4.90 






3.50 


4.00 


4.50 





3.90 


4.10 


4.60 





5.60 


5.90 


6.40 





7.00 


7.20 


7.60 



5.50 



6.20 



because of independent rounding. 

gravel pump operations were vertically integrated through 



other producing tin deposits, yielding more tin per metric 
ton of ore mined. This resulted in a very low total cost (at a 
0-pct DCFROR) of $4.80/lb Sn (table 13). The average 
total cost for all underground operations was weighted 
heavily by Bolivian production. (Bolivia's underground 
mines accounted for 37 pet of the annual MEC tin metal 
production.) Bolivia's total cost (0-pct DCFROR) of 
$5.70/lb Sn appears comparable to other underground 
operations in U.S. dollar terms, but is unrealistically low 
because of the tremendous devaluation of Bolivian 
currency. See the "Total Availability" section for a further 
discussion of Bolivia's currency. 

Underground mining and beneficiation costs per 
pound of refined Sn ranged from $2.50/lb Sn in the 
Southeast Asian countries to $4.20/lb in the Republic of 
South Africa. The four Southeast Asian operations 
produce tin from much higher grade deposits than those 
mined by the South African operations. 

A large portion of total underground costs is the 



combined smelter and refinery operating costs. The 
weighted-average smelter-refinery cost for producing 
underground MEC deposits was about $1.00/lb Sn 
compared to $0.10/lb and $0.20/lb Sn, respectively, for 
concentrates from gravel pump and dredge operations. 
This difference was due largely to the high cost of 
smelting concentrates from underground mines in Boli- 
via, Japan, Peru, and the United Kingdom (table 13). 
Bolivia has high treatment charges imposed on tin 
concentrates by its state-controlled smelters and re- 
fineries. Japan has high treatment charges in addition to 
charges imposed because of impurities (some recoverable 
as byproducts) in the concentrates. The United Kingdom 
and Peru both have their concentrates treated by the high 
cost Capper Pass facilities, in England. Concentrates from 
the United Kingdom have impurities which are removed 
at the smelter, and Peru's concentrates are transported a 
great distance. Both of these factors impact the smelter- 
refinery costs. The average byproduct credit for under- 



35 



ground tin operations was $0.80/lb, compared to almost no 
byproduct revenues generated in gravel pump or dredge 
operations. 

Bolivia was estimated to have the highest total cost 
for underground deposits, at about $5.70/lb Sn (0-pct 
DCFROR). The major difference between Bolivia's total 
costs and those of other producing underground mines was 
taxes. Bolivian producers were levied $1.60/lb of refined 
tin. This value was effectively a royalty of 53 pet of gross 
revenues minus an allowable operating cost deduction 
determined by the Government. 

The lowest total cost (0-pct DCFROR) for producing 
underground mines was $4.50/lb Sn in the United 
Kingdom. The United Kingdom's 4 producing under- 
ground mines contain almost 40,000 mt Sn, or over 10 pet 
of the total recoverable tin among the 42 underground 
deposits evaluated. 

A small Bolivian mine had one of the lowest total 
costs. Its feed grade was over 3.4 pet Sn, and its total cost 
was less than $2.00/lb Sn (0-pct DCFROR). The Sichon 
Mine in Thailand had one of the highest costs among 
underground producers, with a mining and beneficiation 
cost of $30.00/mt ore and a total cost over $10.00/lb Sn 
(0-pct DCFROR). This mine had one of the lowest feed 
grades of any of the evaluated underground mines, at 0.25 
pet Sn. Comparison of the Sichon Mine's total cost with 
the high-grade Bolivian mine's total cost illustrates the 
direct correlation between grade and total cost for 
underground deposits. 

One of the largest underground tin mines in the world 
is Australia's Renison Mine. At the time of the study, it 
contained over 25 pet of the 365,000 mt of recoverable tin 
estimated for producing underground deposits and had a 
capacity of about 850,000 mt/yr ore. Its mining and 
beneficiation cost of $42.00/mt ore and low total cost of less 
than $4.00/lb Sn (0-pct DCFROR) contrasted with most of 
Australia's other tin mines, which are primarily lower 
grade open pit operations and thus have higher total costs. 

Although mining and beneficiation costs per metric 
ton of ore are higher for underground mining than for any 
other tin mining method, lower mining and beneficiation 
costs per pound of refined tin in underground mining are 
the direct result of higher grade deposits. Byproduct 
revenues realized by several of the underground opera- 
tions also reduce operating costs. 

Open Pit Mines 

The 10 producing open pit mines evaluated in this 
study accounted for less than 5 pet of the recoverable tin in 
MEC's, with production of over 400,000 mt/yr ore, yielding 
over 4,500 mt/yr Sn metal. The major portion of their 
average total cost of $5.90/lb Sn (0-pct DCFROR) was 
mining. The Australian open pit operations had an 
average mining cost of $10.60/lb Sn. The cost was 
weighted heavily by the Greenbushes tin mine, which 
accounted for over 40 pet of the available tin ore from open 
pit operations. Greenbushes produces tin and tantalum 
primarily from an open pit operation and a smaller 
capacity underground operation. The mining method used 
there has varied over the last few years in order to 
enhance the recovery of byproduct tantalum, an impor- 
tant revenue producer. The $6.90/lb Sn byproduct credit 
for Australian mines is due primarily to byproduct 
tantalum recovered at Greenbushes. 

The largest producing open pit mine evaluated in this 



study was Namibia's Uis tin mine. The burden of the total 
cost for this mine was in mining and beneficiation. With 
one of the longest projected production lives of any of the 
deposits evaluated in this study, and operating at a 
relatively low total cost (0-pct DCFROR), Uis is expected to 
continue to be a major open pit tin producer. 

Summary 

Total operating costs (at a 0-pct DCFROR) for 
producing tin mines averaged about $5.10/lb Sn (table 11). 
They ranged from a low of $3.30/lb Sn, the aggregated 
total cost for Argentina, Peru, Japan, and Burma, to a 
high of $6.20/lb Sn in Thailand. Total costs were weighted 
heavily by countries producing tin from alluvial deposits, 
such as Malaysia, which accounted for almost 40 pet of the 
recoverable tin metal and 30 pet of the annual production 
among evaluated tin producing countries. 

The largest portion of total costs was mining and 
beneficiation of the ore. The most significant factor 
affecting mining and beneficiation costs on a cost-per- 
pound-of-tin basis was the feed grade. A comparison of 
costs between underground and dredging operations 
(table 13) indicated that, although underground mining 
and beneficiation costs were more than 50 times higher 
per metric ton of ore, the total cost per pound of refined tin 
was only 14 pet greater because of much higher grade 
deposits. Feed grades for underground mines are often 100 
times greater than for surface mines. Berjuntai, a typical 
dredging operation in Malaysia, had a feed grade 100 
times lower than the 0.704-pct-Sn average feed grade for 
all underground deposits. Extremely high mining and 
beneficiation costs per metric ton of ore among under- 
ground mines and very low mining and beneficiation costs 
among dredging operations yield comparable mining and 
beneficiation costs per pound of refined Sn. 



CAPITAL COSTS 

Capital costs include exploration, land acquisition, 
development, mine and mill plant and equipment costs, 
and infrastructure. Reinvestments for maintenance and 
equipment replacement are required over the mine's life. 
Since most of the producing tin operations evaluated in 
this study have been producing for many years, initial 
investments were depreciated. For this reason, projected 
investment data for underground operations and one 
producing deposit were used in this analysis. 

The largest single tin producing region in the world is 
Perak State in Malaysia, where most of the tin produced is 
from gravel pumps. Based on projected capital invest- 
ments necessary to develop tin deposits, Malaysian gravel 
pumps require the least amount of capital. The costs 
presented in table 14 are for a hypothetical gravel pump 
operation in Malaysia. The proposed operation utilizes 
mechanical means for overburden stripping to a depth of 
16 m in a 9.3-m-thick ore zone with a grade of 0.011 pet tin 
oxide. Assuming an average ore production of 540,000 
mt/yr (or approximately 48 mt/yr of refined tin), and an 
average gravel pump operation life of 24 yr, total 
production from this deposit was projected to be over 1,000 
mt tin metal. The capital investment necessary to bring 
this tin deposit on-line as a gravel pumping operation was 
determined to be $1,435 million. This amount does not 
include investments necessary to acquire the mineral 
rights, undertake exploration, or pay for infrastructure. 



36 



Table 14. — Capital investments for a hypothetical 
540,000-mt yr-tin-ore gravel pump operation 

Cost. 1982 
U.S. dollars 

Gravel pump mining: 

Gravel pump 88,000 

Water pumps 79.000 

Tailing pump 65.000 

Auxiliary pump 67,000 

Jig plant 13,000 

Palong and trommel 33,000 

Gravel pipings 61 ,000 

Monitors, water pipings, water valves 23,000 

Miscellaneous mining equipment 9,000 

750 kV«A electrical installation and fittings 25,000 

Living quarters (kongsi) and tin shed 13,000 

Gravel pump shed, tailing pump shed, water pumps 

shed, other installations 9,000 

0.75-m 3 backhoe and bulldozer 98,000 

Miscellaneous contract work wages 4,000 

Total 587,000 

Overburden stripping: 

2 backhoe units, 1.3 m 3 196.000 

1 2 haulage trucks 241 .000 

Bulldozer 31 ,000 

Total 468.000 

Preproduction development: 
Overburden dry stripping to a depth of 13.7 m 

(344,050 m 3 ) 100,000 

Gravel pump mining from stripping depth to ore 

horizon (229,370 m 3 ) 280,000 

Total 380,000 

Grand total 1,435,000 



Of the 16 undeveloped operations evaluated, only 3 
were potential gravel pump operations. Their estimated 
total recoverable tin metal ranged from 660 to almost 
80,000 mt, with capital costs from $1.9 to $13.4 million. 
The capital investment required for the hypothetical 
operation was lower than the evaluated undeveloped 
gravel pump operations because investments for acquisi- 
tion, development, and infrastructure were not included 
in the hypothetical operation. 

For dredge operations, one of the larger capital 
investments is the dredge itself. An offshore dredge 
designed for Tongkah Harbor in Thailand, with a 
proposed output of 1,186 mt/yr of tin concentrates, cost 
$23 million (in 1982 U.S. dollars) (49). Assuming a grade 
of 0.024 pet Sn and a mill concentrate grade of 75 pet 
(based on averages for producing Thai operations), this 



Table 15. — Capital investments for underground tin mines 

Cost, 1982 
U.S. dollars 

Hypothetical (Thai) mine with 21 ,000-mt/yr-tin-ore 
capacity: 

Exploration 1 30,000 

Development 1 80,000 

Mine equipment 375,000 

Millsurface 400,000 

Mill plant 600,000 

Infrastructure 450,000 

Miscellaneous 65,000 

Total 2,200,000 

Wheal Concord Mine, 250,000-mt/yr-tin-ore capacity: 

Exploration 2,000,000 

Mine capital 3.000,000 

Surface capital 4,000,000 

Mill plant and equipment 9,000,000 

Infrastructure 1 ,500,000 

Miscellaneous 500,000 

Total 20,000,000 



operation would produce about 3.7 million mt/yr ore 
(approximately 2.3 million m 3 /yr). The No. 9 dredge built 
for Petaling Tin in Malaysia is expected to dredge to a 
depth of 40 m when it goes on-line. This dredge has a life 
expectancy of 8 to 10 yr and should process almost 2 
million m 3 /yr ore. Its cost was about $16 million (in 1982 
U.S. dollars) (49). 

Average capital costs for Indonesian dredge opera- 
tions were allocated among four major categories: 22 pet 
was for exploration and development, 25 pet for equip- 
ment, 43 pet for infrastructure, and the remaining 10 pet 
was for other costs. 

Capital costs were also estimated for a small 
hypothetical underground mine in Thailand and for the 
Wheal Concord underground deposit in the United 
Kingdom. The hypothetical Thai mine was a 21,000-mt/ 
yr-ore (150-mt/yr-Sn-metal) operation, with capital cost 
estimates based on other underground Thai properties 
with similar capacities. Its costs are presented in table 15. 

The Wheal Concord deposit is a 250,000 mt/yr-ore 
operation with a tin metal production capacity over ten 
times larger than that of the Thai property. Its estimated 
costs are also presented in table 15. 

Depending on the size, type, mineralogy, and depth of 
an ore body, capital costs for the development of 
underground deposits may vary greatly. 



TIN AVAILABILITY 



An economic evaluation was performed on each of the 
146 mines and deposits included in the study to determine 
the average total cost of tin production over the producing 
life of each mine or deposit. Some of the mines evaluated 
are actually mining regions, such as Johor and Perak 
States in Malaysia, which contain large numbers of small 
family-owned gravel pump or dredging operations that 
are too small to be evaluated individually but as an 
aggregate are significant producers. 

The evaluation used DCFROR techniques to deter- 
mine the constant-dollar long-run average total cost of tin 
production. (DCFROR's are discussed in the "Methodolo- 
gy" section.) This average total cost is equivalent to the 



tin price each operation would require over the long run 
for the discounted sum of total revenues from the sale of 
tin and associated byproducts (if any) to be sufficient to 
equal the discounted sum of all costs of production over 
the life of the operation. Annual cash flows were 
discounted at prespecified rates of return at both 0- and 
15-pct DCFROR's. 

One producing mine was determined to have a zero 
long-term total cost associated with tin production at both 
a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR. This means there would be no 
costs remaining to be covered by tin production after 
allowance for byproduct credits. 

For government-owned operations, the profit motive 



37 



may be subservient to other government objectives, such 
as employment, the need for foreign exchange, or other 
national development programs. Since most of the large 
tin mining companies are either government-owned or 
government-controlled, this study emphasized the total 
cost of production at a 0-pct DCFROR, since a 15-pct 
DCFROR, in many cases, is not particularly relevant to 
the development of new tin deposits. 

An implicit assumption in each evaluation is that 
each deposit represents a separate corporate entity. The 
life of each property was determined by assuming the 
property would operate at 100 pet of mine capacity. The 
mine life covers only the demonstrated resource level, 
which, for tin, tends to be a very conservative estimate 
owing to the added expense of blocking out new reserves 
in countries such as Bolivia, or government philosophies 
of exploration which, in the past, did not actively seek out 
new sources of tin as long as existing resources were 
considered adequate, as in countries such as Malaysia. 
Recent reductions of sales by 40 pet of capacity in ITC 
countries and the existence of significant quantities of tin 
not yet defined as demonstrated resources can be expected 
to extend mine lives beyond those given in this report. 

All capital investments incurred 15 or more years 
before the cost date of the analysis (January 1984) were 
treated as sunk costs. For investments incurred during 
the prior 15 yr, undepreciated balances were entered as 
1984 capital investments. All subsequent investments, 
reinvestments, operating costs and transportation costs 
are expressed in constant (unescalated) January 1984 
dollars. The resource and cost data evaluated were based 
on January 1982 data updated to January 1984 values. 
Additions to demonstrated resources, if any, between 
January 1982 and January 1984 were not accounted for. 

Investment and operating schedules were determined 
as much as possible from published data or plans 
announced by the companies involved. For explored 
deposits for which no plans to initiate production had been 
announced, a development plan was assumed. The 
assumed preproduction period for these explored deposits 
allowed for only the minimum engineering and develop- 
ment time necessary to initiate production. Additional 
time lags and potential costs that might result from filing 
environmental impact statements, receiving required 
permits, arranging financing, etc., were not accounted for 
in the analyses, although such delays and costs may be 
quite significant. 

The potential tonnage and average total cost deter- 
mined over the estimated producing life of each mine and 
deposit evaluated were aggregated into availability 
curves which illustrate the potential availability of tin at 
different cost levels. Availability curves are constructed 
as aggregations of the total amount of tin potentially 
available from each mine and deposit, ordered from those 
having the lowest average total cost to those having the 
highest. An availability curve provides a concise, easy-to- 
read, graphic analysis of the comparative costs associated 
with any given level of potential output and provides an 
estimate of what the average long-run tin price (in 
January 1984 dollars, in this study), would likely have to 
be in order for a given tonnage to be potentially available 
to the marketplace. Two types of curves were generated: 
(1) total availability curves and (2) annual curves at 
selected total production costs. Annual curves are simply 
a disaggregation of the total curve to show annual tin 
availability at various costs of production. 



TOTAL AVAILABILITY 

The 146 tin mines and deposits (130 producing mines 
and 16 deposits that were either explored or under 
development) evaluated in 18 MEC's represented a 
demonstrated in situ tonnage of 23.1 billion mt ore 
containing 2.8 million mt of potentially recoverable tin 
metal. Producing mines accounted for 2.5 million mt of 
recoverable tin (88.5 pet of the total), and undeveloped 
deposits account for 321,000 mt (11.5 pet of the total). 

The relative shares of recoverable tin, by country, 
from producing mines and undeveloped deposits are 
illustrated in figure 14. The two charts in figure 14 
illustrate the dominance of the Southeast Asian countries 
in the world tin industry. About 73 pet of the recoverable 
tin resource evaluated in MEC's was in Malaysia, 
Indonesia, and Thailand (fig. 5). The share of recoverable 



Brazil 
18 pet 
Namibia 
2 2 pet 



■United Kingdom 
1.6 pet 




Producing mines and regions 



Namibia 

United States / 08 pet 

6.0 pet • 




Undeveloped deposits and regions 

Figure 14. — Distribution of potentially recoverable tin from 
producing and undeveloped mines and regions in MEC's, by 
country. 



38 



o 
o 





i i i r 1 




' 


MARKET ECONOMY COUNTRIES 


- 




KEY f 


- 










- 


15-pct DCFROR 


- 


_ 


r r 




~ 


r 1 J — ' 


- 


^_.___ z _-^^^~ 


i-'vi / "" r " 


\S 


1 1 1 I i 


- 



500 



1,000 



2,000 



2,500 





200 



300 



400 



2 - 



500 600 700 25 50 75 

RECOVERABLE TIN, thousand metric Tons 





1 1 


II'! 


1 ' ! 


,_ 


- 




THAILAND 




1 

1 

l 
1 r 
ll 










M 
M 


- 




H 




- 


- 




r^~ 




- 




1 


n — 1 






" 




I I 


i i i i 


1 1 1 





100 



125 150 



75 200 225 250 275 



Figure 15.— Total recoverable tin from producing mines and undeveloped deposits in all evaluated countries and in 
Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand at both a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR in January 1984 U.S. dollars. 



tin from producing mines in these three countries 
constituted almost 80 pet of the total from producing 
mines. Since most of the demonstrated tin resources of 
Southeast Asia were under exploitation, the region's 
share of recoverable tin from undeveloped deposits was 
much smaller, consisting of undeveloped Malaysian 
deposits which accounted for 25.4 pet of the total. 

Figure 15 shows total availability curves for all 
MEC's and individual curves for Indonesia, Malaysia, and 
Thailand at both 0- and 15-pct DCFROR's. About 2.8 
million mt of tin was estimated to be recoverable at total 
production costs ranging from $0 to $19. 0071b at a 0-pct 
DCFROR and from $0 to $31.80/lb at a 15-pct DCFROR. 
(Properties with estimated average total costs greater 
than $20/lb were not included on the curves.) On the 0-pct 
DCFROR curve, approximately 138,000 mt of tin was 
potentially recoverable at costs ranging up to $3.00/lb, 
824,000 mt was recoverable at costs ranging up to 
$4.00/lb, 1.5 million mt was recoverable at costs up to 
$5.00/lb, and 2.5 million mt was available at costs ranging 
up to $7.00/lb. Ninety pet of the recoverable tin was 
potentially recoverable at costs under $7.00/lb at a 0-pct 
DCFROR. The 15-pct-DCFROR curve shows that approx- 
imately 94,000 mt of tin was potentially recoverable at 
costs ranging from up to $3.00/lb, 430,000 mt was 
recoverable at costs ranging up to $4.00/lb, 1.1 million mt 
was recoverable at costs up to $5.00/lb, and 2.2 million mt 



was recoverable at costs ranging up to $7.00/lb. Almost 80 
pet of the recoverable tin was potentially recoverable at 
costs under $7.00/lb at a 15-pct DCFROR. These estimated 
costs were determined assuming full-capacity production; 
current production costs for mine operating at less than 
full capacity in countries under ITC production quotas 
could be slightly higher. Recently, some operations were 
operating at less than capacity, others were temporarily 
shut down, and others were operating at capacity but 
stockpiling up to 40 pet of their production. 

The following discussions of tin availability, by 
country, provide estimates of potential tin availability at 
different ranges of estimated average total production 
costs. In interpreting the availability data presented, the 
reader should keep in mind that the market price for tin in 
January 1984 was $5.69/lb and the weighted average 
price for tin in 1984 was $5.96/lb. Given recent price 
trends (table 2), the average price for tin over the long run 
(in January 1984 dollars) may be below the 1984 price 
data, indicating that the tin industry could likely become 
even more competitive than it is now. 

The curve for Malaysia (fig. 15) shows 1.1 million mt 
tin potentially recoverable from 36 mines and deposits (or 
regions) at costs ranging from $1.80 to $8.60/lb at a 0-pct 
DCFROR (and from $2.00 to $10.80/lb at a 15-pct 
DCFROR). At a 0-pct DCFROR, about 47,000 mt tin was 
potentially available at total production costs under 



39 



$3.00/lb, 191,000 mt was available at costs ranging up to 
$4.00/lb, 359,000 mt was available at costs under $5.00/lb, 
and slightly less than 1.1 million mt was available at costs 
ranging up to $7.00/lb. Only 46,000 mt would have an 
estimated production cost above $7.00/lb. At a 15-pct 
DCFROR, potential availability was 24,000 mt tin at total 
production costs under $3.00/lb, 171,000 mt at costs 
ranging up to $4.00/lb, 210,000 mt at costs under $5.00/lb, 
and 972,000 mt at costs up to $7.00/lb. An additional 
127,000 mt tin would have an estimated potential 
production cost of over $7.00/lb. 

The curve for Indonesia (fig. 15) shows 685,000 mt of 
tin potentially recoverable from 7 mines (or regions) at 
costs ranging from $2.50 to $5.30/lb at a 0-pct DCFROR 
(and from $2.60 to $6.60/lb at a 15-pct DCFROR). Almost 
590,000 mt of this tin was estimated to have a total 
production cost of under $5.00/lb at a 0-pct DCFROR, and 
465,000 mt was estimated to have a total cost under 
$5.00/lb at a 15-pct DCFROR. 

The curve for Thailand (fig. 15) shows 270,000 mt of 
tin potentially recoverable from 25 mines with total 
production costs ranging from $0.90 to $11.20/lb at a 0-pct 
DCFROR ($1.10 to $13.40/lb at a 15-pct DCFROR). At a 
0-pct DCFROR, slightly over 29,000 mt of tin was 
potentially recoverable at production costs ranging up to 
$3.00/lb, 49,000 mt was recoverable at costs under $4.00/ 
lb, 76,000 mt was recoverable at costs under $5.00/lb, and 
143,000 mt was recoverable at costs ranging up to 



$7.00/lb. An additional 128,000 mt of tin was potentially 
recoverable at total production costs over $7.00/lb. 
Thailand had the highest weighted-average total cost of 
the Southeast Asian producers ($6.20/mt at a 0-pct 
DCFROR), largely owing to its export tax, which was 
approximately $1.60/lb higher than Malaysia's or Indone- 
sia's export tax. Avoidance of this tax burden is one of the 
main reasons that most of the smuggled tin in Southeast 
Asia comes out of Thailand. 

Figure 16 compares potential production from produc- 
ing mines and undeveloped deposits at both a 0- and 
15-pct DCFROR. These curves show that most (88.5 pet) of 
the demonstrated tin resources was from producing mines, 
and also show the effect of the cost of capital at a 15-pct 
DCFROR. The average cost difference at the 0- and 15-pct 
DCFROR's was much less for producing mines ($0.60/lb) 
than it was for new operations ($4.50/lb) since many 
producing tin mines are not extremely capital intensive 
and much of the original capital investment was 
depreciated. 

The data from the curves were disaggregated as 
shown in table 16, to show the potential production and 
weighted-average total costs, by country, for producing 
mines and undeveloped deposits. Potential production and 
weighted-average total costs at both 0- and 15-pct 
DCFROR are shown. To determine the weighted-average 
costs shown in table 16, the mines and deposits were 
evaluated using 1982 production costs, which were then 



20 



c 

■D 
O 
Q. 

k_ 
(U 

Q. 

if) 

L. 

o 
o 



o 
o 

_l 
< 

O 




Undeveloped deposits at 
a 15-pct DCFROR 



Undeveloped deposits at 
a 0-pct DCFROR 



Producing mines or regions at 
a 15-pct DCFR0R> 




'Producing mines or regions at 
a O-pct DCFROR 



Jl 



1.0 1.5 

RECOVERABLE TIN, million metric tons 



2.0 



2.5 



Figure 16. — Comparison of total recoverable tin from producing mines and undeveloped deposits in MEC's at both a 0- and 
15-pct DCFROR in January 1984 U.S. dollars. 



40 



Table 16. — Comparison of estimated long-run average total 

costs of potential tin production from producing mines and 

undeveloped deposits at a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR in January 

1984 U.S. dollars 

Producing mines Undeveloped deposits 

Weighted-av Weighted-av 

total cost, total cost, 

Countr V Potential $/lb Sn Potential $/lb Sn 

production, 0-pct 15-pct production, 0-pct 15-pct 

10 3 mt DCFROR DCFROR 10 3 mt DCFROR DCFROR 

Argentina . . . . 2~9 W W NAp NAp NAp 

Australia 135.3 6.10 7.20 49.6 6.40 10.70 

Bolivia 97.8 5.50 6.20 38.7 W W 

Brazil 43.9 4.00 4.50 23.0 2.80 3.70 

Burma 9.3 1.60 2. NAp NAp NAp 

Canada NAp NAp NAp 58.8 W W 

Indonesia .... 685.1 4.20 4.80 NAp NAp NAp 

Japan 7.0 7.70 10.10 NAp NAp NAp 

Malaysia 1,017.7 5.50 6.00 81.4 5.50 10.70 

Namibia 54.2 W W 2.6 WW 

Nigeria 16.0 W W NAp NAp NAp 

Peru 34.4 W W NAp NAp NAp 

South Africa, 

Republic of. 29.1 4.60 5.40 NAp NAp NAp 

Thailand 270.3 6.20 6.80 NAp NAp NAp 

United 

Kingdom ... 39.4 4.50 5.70 47.5 4.00 6.50 

United States NAp NAp NAp 19.2 W W 

Zaire 19.4 W W NAp NAp NAp 

Zimbabwe ... 16.8 W W NAp NAp NAp 

Total 1 or 
weighted 
av 2,478.7 5.10 5.70 320.7 6.00 10.50 

NAp Not applicable. W Withheld; company proprietary data. 
' Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 



Table 17.— Comparison of estimated long-run average total 

costs of potential tin production from producing mines and 

undeveloped deposits at a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR in January 

1984 U.S. dollars 

Producing mines Undeveloped deposits 

Weighted-av Weighted-av 

total cost, total cost, 

Coun "y Potential $/lb Sn Potential $/lb Sn 

production, 0-pct 15-pct production, 0-pct 15-pct 

10 3 mt DCFROR DCFROR 10 3 mt DCFROR DCFROR 

Argentina .... 4.1 W W NAp NAp NAp 

Australia 155.7 5.90 7.20 49.6 6.50 10.80 

Bolivia 135.3 9.40 10.20 38.7 W W 

Brazil 58.8 5.20 6.00 23.0 3.80 5.00 

Burma 11.0 1.70 2.20 NAp NAp NAp 

Canada NAp NAp NAp 58.8 W W 

Indonesia . . 735.1 5.30 6.00 NAp NAp NAp 

Japan 7.9 8.90 10.20 NAp NAp NAp 

Malaysia 1,122.0 5.20 5.60 81.4 5.50 10.70 

Namibia 55.8 W W 2.6 WW 

Nigeria 20.0 W W NAp NAp NAp 

Peru 39.8 W W NAp NAp NAp 

South Africa, 

Republic of 34.3 4.60 5.50 NAp NAp NAp 

Thailand 335.6 5.70 6.50 NAp NAp NAp 

United 

Kingdom . . . 48.8 5.40 6.80 47.5 4.60 7.30 

United States NAp NAp NAp 19.2 W W 

Zaire 24.0 W W NAp NAp NAp 

Zimbabwe ... 19.8 W W NAp NAp NAp 

Total 1 or 
weighted 
av 2,807.9 5.50 6.10 320.7 6.10 10.40 

NAp Not applicable. W Withheld; company proprietary data. 
1 Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 



Table 18. — Estimated potential 1984 production capacities for producing mines, with costs derived at a 0-pct DCFROR, metric tons 1 



Country 

0-3.00 3.01-4.00 

Argentina 610 

Australia 6,010 

Bolivia 1 ,330 6,230 

Brazil 780 4,080 

Burma 890 

Indonesia 4,380 8,930 

Japan 

Malaysia 4,460 12,220 

Namibia 790 

Nigeria 1 ,990 

Peru 3,730 

South Africa, Republic of 

Thailand 1 ,470 61 

United Kingdom 

Zaire 

Zimbabwe 

Total 2 15,910 42,590 

1 Costs are in Jan. 1984 U.S. dollars. Capacities are based on 1982 data. 

2 Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 



Tin cost, $/lb 



4.01-5.00 



5.01-7.00 



Over 7.00 



Total 2 












610 





1,660 


1,960 


9,630 


4,430 


1,390 


3,400 


16,770 


2,000 


2,010 


140 


9,010 











890 


8,570 


3,520 





25,410 








390 


390 


13,110 


20,290 


2,070 


52,150 











790 











1,990 











3,730 


2,020 


370 


190 


- 2,580 


1,780 


12,800 


16,970 


33,630 


1,730 


2,930 





4,660 





2,300 





2,300 





1,500 





1,500 



33,640 



48,780 



25,100 



166.020 



updated to January 1984 dollars using the Bureau's 
Mining Cost Indexation System. Countries whose curren- 
cies had devalued by more than their domestic inflation 
rates relative to the U.S. dollar show U.S. -dollar-based 
January 1984 costs that are lower than the costs were in 
January 1982. The major tin producing countries most 
affected by this foreign-exchange bias were Bolivia, 
Brazil, and Indonesia. Bolivia, in particular, had under- 
gone an extremely rapid devaluation of the Peso Boliviano 
since late 1981. The Bolivian inflation rate was 
approaching 1,000 pet per year; not only creating 
economic chaos within that country, but also making any 
attempt to measure actual costs in U.S. dollar terms 
extremely tenuous. 

The data from table 16 is presented in table 17 using 
January 1982 dollars for comparison purposes. The 
estimated tonnage of total recoverable tin from producing 



mines in 1984 was based on 1982 resource data minus 2 yr 
of estimated production, at full capacity. Therefore, the 
tonnage figures on table 18 are larger than the tonnage 
figures on table 16. The comparison between 1982 and 
1984 dollar costs also includes the differential of byprod- 
uct prices between 1982 and 1984. In general, commodity 
prices were lower in 1984 than they were in 1982, 
meaning they would have had less impact toward 
lowering the total cost of tin production than they did in 
1982. The effect of exchange rates on dollar-based total 
cost estimates was, therefore, even more significant for 
countries whose estimated total cost of tin production was 
lower in 1984 dollars than in 1982 dollars 

Of the major tin producing countries shown in tables 
16 and 17, estimated total production costs in dollar terms 
actually declined in Bolivia, Brazil, Burma, Indonesia, 
Japan, the Republic of South Africa, and the United 



41 



Kingdom. All of these countries had currencies that 
devalued relative to the U.S. dollar at a faster rate than 
their domestic inflation rates. The most dramatic change 
occurred in Bolivia, where the Peso Boliviano was 
devalued from $b24.51 to the U.S. dollar at the beginning 
of 1982 to $b230 to the dollar at the beginning of 1984 
(and stood at $b2,000 to the dollar in September 1984). 
Bolivia showed a weighted-average total production cost 
of $5.50/lb in 1984 dollars at a 0-pct DCFROR, compared 
to $9.40/lb in 1982 dollars. The $9.40/lb cost of tin was 
probably a more accurate reflection of the total cost of 
Bolivian tin production in real terms than the much lower 
$5.50/lb cost in 1984 dollars. Any cost savings to Bolivia in 
this situation would have come from the decrease in real 
income of the Bolivian miners, which fell dramatically 
over the last few years. This plunge in real income was 
probably responsible for a spate of work stoppages at 
several COMIBOL mines in 1984. Such occurrences tend 
to have an adverse effect on profitability and would 
contribute to a total cost picture that is probably higher 
than the $5.50/lb estimate in 1984 dollars (at a 0-pct 
DCFROR). 

Only Australia, Malaysia, and Thailand showed 
actual increases in production costs from 1982 to 1984 in 
U.S. -dollar terms. All three of these countries had 
domestic inflation rates relative to the U.S. inflation rate 
that were higher than any devaluations that occurred 
between 1982 and 1984. The exchange rate for the 
Malaysian Ringgit fluctuated around M$2.33 per U.S. 
dollar, while the value of the Australian dollar declined 
from $1.14 to $0.90 during the same period. The value of 
the Thai Baht was pegged at B23 per U.S. dollar during 
this period. Further devaluations may have occurred since 
the study was concluded. 



ANNUAL AVAILABILITY 

Another method of illustrating tin availability is to 
disaggregate the total resource availability curve and 
show potential availability on an annual basis. For 
analysis, separate annual availability curves were con- 
structed for producing mines and proposed (undeveloped) 
operations in MEC's. Although no accurate development 
schedule could be proposed for all of the undeveloped 
deposits, the potential annual availability curves for these 
deposits were useful for indicating estimated potential 
capacity and estimated cost levels of future tin production. 

The annual curves are valuable in that they 
graphically illustrate annual production potential at 
different cost levels. The curves are not intended as 
projections of actual production during the years shown, 
but they do illustrate annual production potential at 
estimated capacity rates. 

Producing Mines and Regions 

Potential annual production of tin from producing 
mines (and regions) in MEC's at a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR, 
from 1984 to 1995, is shown in figures 17 and 18. The 
curves reflect the production capacity of existing mines, 
including planned expansions when known. It was 
assumed that all operations produce at full (100 pet) 
capacity over the life of the mine. The curves could not 
take into account ITC sales quotas, production cutbacks 
mandated by market conditions, or smuggled tin, since 



these factors are likely to vary on an annual basis and 
would be difficult to project. Since actual production was 
at less than capacity levels at the time of the study (at 
least on a countrywide basis among ITC members), it is 
not likely that potential annual production will decline to 
the extent shown in the curves, since much production 
potential was being deferred. Furthermore, since this 
study is based on a static 1982 resource estimate, these 
curves do not reflect the fact that mineral resource 
estimates historically have increased over time or 
remained relatively constant owing to ongoing explora- 
tion programs in existing mines and the discovery of new _ 
ore bodies. This is particularly important in countries 
such as Bolivia, where underground mines tend to 
maintain resource estimates which often exceed no more 
than 3-5 yr of production at current mining levels. This is 
partially due to the nature and complexity of the ore 
bodies, and partially due to the added cost of blocking out 
reserves further ahead of current production. The Boliv- 
ians possess millions of tons of old tailings (some of which 
are now being treated) which have high enough tin grades 
to eventually become economic when and if the need 
arises to exploit these resources. 

Figures 17 and 18 show a gradual decline in 
production capacity among producing mines, from 166 
million mt in 1984 to 72.3 million mt in 1995, as the 
demonstrated resources of a number of mines become 
exhausted. As mentioned above, such a decline is unlikely 
for some producers, but there is concern among low-cost 
producers such as Malaysia that new capacity from 
existing mines will be more expensive to develop than 
currently available capacity since ore grades at dredging 
operations have been declining. In order to expand future 
tin production, the Malaysians will likely have to resort to 
even more costly underground lode mining in moun- 
tainous areas of Malaysia which are currently under 
exploration. 

The data presented in figures 17 and 18 are shown in 
tabular form in tables 18 through 21. These tables show 
the estimated annual production capacities for producing 
mines in each producing country at different cost levels, in 
1984 and 1995 and at both a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR. For 
each country, these tables provide a detailed breakdown of 
the different cost levels of production from producing 
mines. 

The historic prices of tin from 1975 to 1984 (table 2), 
showed a trend of declining tin prices from 1979 to 1984. 
The 1984 low level of tin prices obviously had an adverse 
impact on profitability. As shown in table 18, if tin prices 
dropped to as low as $5.00/lb and stayed at that level in 
real terms, less than 56 pet (92,100 mt) of the 1984 
production capacity of 166,020 mt would provide for at 
least a 0-pct DCFROR. Only 44 pet of this production 
capacity (73,240 mt) could be sold at $5.00/lb and return a 
15-pct DCFROR. At the January 1984 tin price of $5.69/lb, 
approximately 103,000 mt of the 1984 tin capacity (62 pet) 
could be produced and return at least a 0-pct DCFROR; at 
the same price, 94,000 mt (57 pet) could be produced and 
earn at least a 15-pct DCFROR. Slightly over 60 pet of the 
1984 tin capacity that could be produced for under $5.00/lb 
at a 0-pct DCFROR (58 pet at a 15-pct DCFROR) is in 
Southeast Asia. 

In 1995, approximately 46,000 mt of tin capacity 
could potentially be produced for under $5.00/lb and 
return at least a 0-pct DCFROR. Of this amount, slightly 
under 36,000 mt (78 pet) would be from Southeast Asia. 
Southeast Asia would account for 74 pet (20,000 mt) of the 



42 



(V 

E 

c 
o 

CO 

3 

o 



140 



120- 



100 



80- 



60 



40 



20- 



$700/lb 




1984 



. $5 CjP/lb 



$400/lb 

0-$ 3.00 /'lb 



(986 



1988 



1990 



1992 



1994 



1996 



Figure 17. — Annual availability of tin from producing mines and regions in MEC's at various cost levels including a 0-pct 
DCFROR in January 1984 U.S. dollars. 




996 



Figure 18. — Annual availability of tin from producing mines and regions in MEC's at various cost levels including a 15-pct 
DCFROR in January 1984 U.S. dollars. 



43 



Table 19.— Estimated potential 1984 production capacities for producing mines, with costs derived at a 15-pct DCFROR, metric tons 1 



Country 

0-3.00 3.01-4.00 

Argentina 610 

Australia 300 

Bolivia 1 .330 5,430 

Brazil 780 2,850 

Burma 890 

Indonesia 4,380 2,030 

Japan 

Malaysia 2,000 12,720 

Namibia 790 

Nigeria 1,990 

Peru 3,730 

South Africa, Republic of 

Thailand 1,470 610 

United Kingdom 

Zaire 

Zimbabwe 

Total 2 11 ,450 30,440 

1 Costs are in Jan. 1984 dollars; capacities are based on 1982 data. 

2 Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 



Tin cost, $/lb 



4.01-500 



5.01-7.00 



Over 7.00 



Total 2 












610 


5,710 


1,660 


1,960 


9,630 


4,570 


1,130 


4,310 


16,770 


2,090 


3,160 


140 


9,010 











890 


12,090 


6,900 





25,410 








390 


390 


5,110 


29,890 


2,430 


52,150 











790 











1.990 











3,730 





2,020 


560 


2,580 


1,780 


1,400 


28,360 


33,630 





4,660 





4,660 





2,300 





2,300 








1,500 


1,500 



31,350 



53.130 



39,640 



166,020 



Table 20. — Estimated potential 1995 production capacities for 

producing mines, with costs derived at a 0-pct DCFROR, 

metric tons 1 



Table 21.— Estimated potential 1995 production capacities for 

producing mines, with costs derived at a 15-pct DCFROR, 

metric tons' 



Tin cost, $/lb 



Tin cost, $/lb 



Country 0-3.00 3.01-4.00 4.01-5.00 5.01-7.00 Over 7.00 Total 2 



Australia 

Bolivia . 

Burma . 

Indonesia 

Japan 

Malaysia 

Namibia . 

South Africa 
Republic 
of 

Thailand . . 

Zimbabwe 

Total 2 . . . 





650 


1,860 






1,060 





5,710 

320 



7,410 



2,740 

790 





610 







330 



10,690 



9,960 





2,020 

1,510 







230 



3,520 



17,380 







1,620 

240 



3,580 17,570 24,520 



23,000 



1,400 







390 

1,240 






700 





7,100 
880 
650 

21,620 
390 

33,180 
790 



2,020 

5,500 

240 



3,720 72,370 



Costs are in January 1984 dollars; capacities are based on 1982 data. 
' Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding 



Country 0-3.00 3.01-4.00 4.01-5.00 5.01-7.00 Over 7.00 Total 2 

Australia . 5,710 1,400 7,100 

Bolivia 880 880 

Burma 650 650 

Indonesia 500 12,090 9,030 21,620 

Japan 390 390 

Malaysia . 970 2,670 950 27,350 1,240 33,180 

Namibia 790 790 

South Africa, 

Republic 

Of 2,020 2,020 

Thailand 1,060 610 1,510 540 1,770 5,500 

Zimbabwe 240 240 

Total 2 . . 2,680 4,580 20,260 39,820 5,040 72,370 

1 Costs are in January 1984 dollars; capacities are based on 1982 data. 

2 Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 



27,500 mt of tin capacity that could be produced in 1995 
for under $5.00/lb and earn at least a 15-pct DCFROR. 

Undeveloped Deposits 

The potential annual availability curves for all 16 of 
the evaluated undeveloped deposits in MEC's at a 0- and 
15-pct DCFROR are shown in figures 19 and 20. Since no 
definite startup date was. known or available for most of 
these deposits, it was assumed that preproduction began 
in a base year (N). Production could not be established in an 
actual year since development of these deposits was not 
expected in the near future. However, the annual curves 
for the undeveloped deposits do show the required lead 
times before production can begin and therefore are 
important in that they show the potential production costs 
and potential annual capacities of future mines. 

In constructing these curves, all undeveloped deposits 
were assumed to begin preproduction development at the 
same time, and thus production from some could begin in 
the year N + 2. The sharp increase in production during 
the next several years is the result of all deposits coming 
on-line at the same time. The assumption of concomitant 
development of all 16 of these deposits overstates the 
tonnage available in a given year since the deposits would 
not be likely to begin preproduction simultaneously. 
Given the depressed situation of the tin industry with its 



associated production quotas from producing mines, it is 
doubtful than many of these deposits will be developed in 
the near future. The annual curve, however, highlights 
the tonnage potential at different cost levels. The 
production breakdown, by country, for the years N + 5 and 
N + 10 at a 0- and 15-pct DCFROR is shown in tables 22 
through 25. 

A total of 10,100 mt of tin could potentially be 
produced in the year N + 5 at a total cost under $5.00/lb 
and return at least a 0-pct DCFROR (table 22). Of this 
potential amount, 33 pet is in Brazil, 32 pet is in 
Australia, 18 pet is in the United Kingdom, and 17 pet is 
in Bolivia. At a 15-pct DCFROR (table 23), approximately 
5300 mt of tin could potentially be produced at a total cost 
under $5.00/lb. Approximately 62 pet of this potential 
capacity is in Brazil. 

The relative lack of demonstrated resources with 
limited potential production from undeveloped deposits 
underscores the weakness of the international tin indus- 
try. There is very little incentive to expend money to 
explore for further resources that, given the state of the 
industry, will not be needed in the immediate future. The 
limited demonstrated resource from undeveloped deposits 
does not indicate a rapidly depleting resource. Rather, it 
reflects the lack of exploration activity in the major 
producing countries. Malaysia, however, has recently 
begun a large Government-funded exploration program. 



44 



22 



20 



18 - 



16- 



14 



12 



c 
o 
<n 10 







6- 



T 1 1 1 1 r 



N Year preproduction 
development begins 



1 1 1 r 




\ 



-^e 



2000/lb 

$ 12.00 /Ib^C^—-- 
$700 /lb 



'•.$5.00/lb 



.0-$3.00/lb - 



N 



N+l 



N + 2 



N+3 



N + 4 N+5 N + 6 N+7 N+8 N+9 N+IO N + ll 

YEAR 
Figure 19.— Potential annual availability of tin from undeveloped deposits in MEC's at various cost levels including a 
O-pct DCFROR in January 1984 U.S. dollars. 



22 
20 

18 
16 
14 

12 



T3 

i i 







8 
6 
4 
2 - 



1 1 1 r 

N Year preproduction 
development begins 



t 1 1 1 r 



/ 



/, 

1 /' 
If 

If 

/ 



/ 



.$32 00/ lb 



$ 10 00/lb_ 



X$700/lb 



J L 



J L 



■ $5.00/lb 
0- $3.00/16^ 

J ^L 



N+l 



N + 2 



N+-3 N+4 



N+5 N+6 N+7 N+8 N+9 N + IO N + ll 

YEAR 
Figure 20. — Potential annual availability of tin from underground deposits in MEC's at various cost levels including a 
15-pct DCFROR in January 1984 U.S. dollars. 



45 



Table 22.— Estimated potential production capacities from 

undeveloped deposits in year N + 5, with costs derived at a 

0-pct DCFROR, metric tons per year 1 

Tin cost, $/lb 

Country 

0-3.00 3.01-5.00 5.01-7.00 Over 7.00 Total 2 

Australia 6 3,210 6" 1,150 4,360 

Bolivia 1,740 1,740 

Brazil 2,740 600 240 3,590 

Canada 3,910 3,910 

Malaysia 2,210 2,210 

Namibia 130 130 

United Kingdom 1 ,790 1 ,790 

United States .0 690 690 

Total 2 2,740 7,340 6,490 1,830 18,410 

N Base year. 

1 Costs are in Jan. 1984 U.S. dollars. 

2 Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 



Table 24. — Estimated potential production capacities from 

undeveloped deposits in year N + 10, with costs derived at a 

0-pct DCFROR, metric tons per year 1 

Tin cost, $/lb 

C ° Un,ry 0-3.00 3.01-5.00 5.01-7.00 Over 7.00 Total 2 

Australia 3,210 330 3,540 

Bolivia 1,740 1,740 

Brazil 300 300 

Canada 3,320 3,320 

Malaysia 3,910 3,910 

Namibia 130 130 

United Kingdom 2,760 2,760 

United States . . 690 690 

Total 2 300 7,720 7,350 1,010 16,380 

N Base year. 

1 Costs are in Jan. 1984 U.S. dollars. 

2 Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 



Table 23.— Estimated potential production capacities from 

undeveloped deposits in year N + 5, with costs derived at a 

15-pct DCFROR, metric tons per year 1 

Country Tin cost ' $/lb 

0-5.00 5.01-7.00 7.01-10.00 Over 7.00 Total 2 

Australia 6 6 3,210 1,150 4,360 

Bolivia 1,740 1,740 

Brazil 2,740 600 240 3,590 

Canada 3,910 3,910 

Malaysia 260 1,950 2,210 

Namibia 130 130 

United Kingdom 1,790 1,790 

United States . . 690 690 

Total 2 2,740 2,650 9,100 3,910 18,410 

N Base year. 

1 Costs are in Jan. 1984 U.S. dollars. 

2 Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 



Table 25. — Estimated potential production capacities from 

undeveloped deposits in year N + 10, with costs derived at a 

15-pct DCFROR, metric tons per year 1 

Tin cost, $/lb 

Country 

0-5.00 5.01-7.00 7.01-10.00 Over 10.00 Total 2 

Australia 3,210 330 3,540 

Bolivia 1,740 1,740 

Brazil 300 300 

Canada 3,320 3,320 

Malaysia 3,910 3,910 

Namibia 130 130 

United Kingdom 2,760 2,760 

United States . . 690 690 

Total 2 300 2,760 8,270 5,060 16,390 

N Base year. 

1 Costs are in Jan. 1984 U.S. dollars. 

2 Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 



Surface 
3.8 pet 




Total recoverable tin, 2,799,000 mt 



Figure 21 .—Percentage share of potentially recoverable tin 
from producing and undeveloped mines, deposits, and regions 
in MEC's, by mining method. 



There is little doubt that hypothetical and inferred 
resources will eventually be blocked out as demonstrated 
resources when the need arises. 

Availability of Tin by Mining Method 

Of the 130 producing mines evaluated for this study, 
41 were actual or proposed dredging operations, 42 were 
underground, 37 were gravel pumps, and 10 were surface 
operations. Mines that used a combination of mining 
methods were classified on the basis of the mine that 
produced the highest proportion of revenues. Over half 
(53.4 pet) of the potential recoverable tin from all types of 
mining methods, for producing mines, was accounted for 
by gravel pumps, followed by dredges (28.1 pet), under- 
ground mines (14.7 pet), and surface mines (1.8 pet). These 
relative percentages are shown graphically in figure 21. 

The distribution of potentially recoverable tin from 
producing mines, by country and mining method, at a 
0-pct DCFROR, is shown in table 26. As shown in the 
table, dredges had the lowest estimated weighted-average 
total production cost, followed by underground mines, 
gravel pumps, and surface mines. The underground cost 
value was skewed somewhat low, however, by the low 
1984 dollar figure for Bolivia, as explained earlier. 
Substituting the 1982 dollar figure for Bolivia, increases 
the weighted-average cost for underground mines to 
$5.60/lb, which is on par with the cost for gravel pumps. 
Although underground mining operations have the 
highest mining operating costs on a cost-per-metric-ton- 
of-ore basis, they also mine higher ore grades than the 
other types of mining operations, thus providing a lower 
cost per pound of metal. 



46 



Table 26. — Potentially recoverable tin from producing mines and estimated total cost 1 at a 0-pct DCFROR, by mining method 

Underground Open pit Gravel pump Dredge 

Country Weighted-av Weighted-av Weighted-av Weighted-av 

Potential total Potential total Potential total Potential total 

production, production production, production production, production production, production 

10 3 mt cost, $/lb Sn 10 3 mt cost, $/lb Sn 10 3 mt cost, $/lb Sn 10 3 mt cost, $/lb Sn 

Zaire NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp 

Argentina 2.9 W NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp 

Australia 94,2 4.0 23.5 11.40 4.0 W 17.1 W 

Bolivia 89.4 5.70 NAp NAp 4.5 W 4.0 3.40 

Brazil NAp NAp 1 .9 W 34.9 3.97 8.3 3.80 

Burma 9.0 W NAp NAp 8.4 W NAp NAp 

Indonesia 44.7 W NAp NAp 275.0 4.10 365.5 4.10 

Japan 7.0 7.70 NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp 

Malaysia 3.4 W 7.2 W 844.2 5.90 162.9 3.50 

Nigeria NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp 16.0 W 

Namibia NAp NAp 54.2 W NAp NAp NAp NAp 

Peru 34.4 W NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp 

South Africa, Republic Of 29.1 4.60 NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp 

Thailand 3.0 W 6.4 5.20 136.8 7.20 124.2 5.00 

United Kingdom 39.4 4.50 NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp 

Zaire NAp NAp NAp NAp 19.4 W NAp NAp 

Zimbabwe 16.8 W NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp NAp 

Total 2 or weighted av 365.2 4~80 932 5~90 1,323.5 JFio 696.7 4~20 

NAp Not applicable. W Withheld; company proprietary data. 

'Jan. 1984 U.S. dollars. 

2 Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. 



CONCLUSIONS 



The 146 mines and deposits (or regions) evaluated for 
this study in 18 MEC's represent a demonstrated in situ 
tonnage of 23.1 billion mt ore containing 2.8 million mt of 
potentially recoverable tin metal. Producing mines 
accounted for approximately 2.5 million mt of recoverable 
tin (88.5 pet of the total), and undeveloped deposits 
(including deposits under development) accounted for 
320,000 mt (11.5 pet). According to resource estimates of 
the countries studied, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand 
had the largest demonstrated tin resources, accounting for 
over 73 pet of the total recoverable tin from the mines and 
deposits evaluated in MEC's. 

Almost half (47.9 pet) of the potential recoverable tin 
from all types of mining methods was accounted for by 
gravel pumps, followed by dredges (29.7 pet), underground 
mines (14.2 pet), and surface mines (8.2 pet). Dredges had 
the lowest estimated weighted-average total production 
costs, followed by underground mines, gravel pumps, and 
surface mines. 

At the January 1984 market price of $5.69/lb, an 
estimated 1.7 million mt of tin could be recovered from 
producing operations at a 0-pct DCFROR. Among the 
evaluated mines and mining regions producing at the 
time of this study, approximately 141,000 mt of tin 
capacity was available in 1984 at costs under $7.00/lb (at a 
0-pct DCFROR). This compares with an estimated 1983 
production of about 172,000 mt. The difference can be 
explained by production from mines not evaluated in this 
study, tin originating from unknown or illegal sources 
(smuggled), and production at costs greater than $7.00/lb. 

From 1980 through 1984, domestic primary tin 
production averaged less than 100 mt/yr, of which over 35 
pet was a byproduct from the Climax molybdenum mine in 



Colorado. The remaining production is from a small 
alluvial operation in Alaska. The Lost River, AK, deposit, 
the only domestic deposit evaluated, contained less than 
20,000 mt of recoverable tin. There are additional 
undeveloped resources in the United States (virtually all 
in Alaska), but they would require high-cost operations or 
are at the inferred resource level. 

Tin differs from most commodities in that the market 
price of the metal is agreed upon by both consumer and 
producer members of the ITC. Owing to falling tin prices, 
members of the ITC have decreased sales by about 40 pet, 
resulting in closures, stockpiling, reduced production and 
some smuggling among member nations. Nonmember 
nations with low mining costs, especially Brazil, have not 
reduced production, but have actually expanded. In 
addition, smuggling of tin, primarily from Southeast Asia, 
may account for at least 10 pet of world production. These 
elements could become the major catalysts in undermin- 
ing any price stabilization efforts taken by the ITC. 

There have been concerns among ITC members that 
sales from the GSA stockpile would further flood the 
market and have deleterious effects on the price of tin. To 
partially allay these fears, the U.S. Government has 
tentatively agreed to limit sales to 3,000 mt/yr of tin. 
Another concern is that tin consuming nations, especially 
Canada and the United Kingdom, are developing or 
expanding their own tin mining industries, thus reducing 
potential sales to these countries. 

The U.S. position, with respect to the availability of 
tin, is relatively secure owing to the large domestic 
stockpile and the fact that tin is readily obtainable on the 
market. 



REFERENCES 



47 



1. Denny, R. L., and D. J. Ottley. Development of Engineering 
and Cost Data for Foreign Tin Properties (contract J0225004, 
Davy McKee Corp.). BuMines OFR 82-85, 1983, 53 pp.; NTIS PB 
85-215838. 

2. Carlin, J. F., Jr. Tin. Sec. in BuMines Mineral Commodity 
Summaries 1984, pp. 164-165. 

3. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Stockpile Report 
to the Congress, October 1983-March 1984. FEMA 36, Oct. 1984, 
p. 25. 

4. Shearson Lehman American Express Inc. Annual Review of 
the World Tin Industry. London, 1984, 107 pp. 

5. Tin International Supplement. V. 57, No. 8, 1984, p. 4. 

6. Rich, P. Future of Tin as a Tonnage Commodity. Inst. Min. 
and Metall., Trans., Sect. A., v. 89, 1980, pp. 18. 

7. Tin International Supplement. V. 57, No. 4, 1984, p. 4. 

8. Mining Journal. Bolivia's Battered Economy. V. 302, No. 
7766, p. 417. 

9. Tin International. Tin in Brazil. V. 57, No. 5, 1984, p. 136. 
10. Brazil Postscript. V. 57, No. 6, 1984, p. 10. 

11. Latin American Mining Letter. ENAF Looks at Precious 
Metals Recovery from Wastes. V. 3, No. 18, 1984, p. 3. 

12. Tin International. Cornish Tin Production Stable. V. 57, 
No. 8, 1984, p. 4. 

13. Australia Mineral Economics Pty. Ltd. The World Tin 
Industry, Sydney, Aust. 1980, 278 pp. 

14. Mining Engineering. Growing Mineral Production Proves 
China's Resource Potential. V. 32, No. 3, 1980, p. 277. 

15. World Mining. Recent Estimates Are Reduced but Future 
Growth Seen. V. 30, No. 9, 1977, p. 116. 

16. Clarified, K., S. Jackson, J. Keefe, M. Noble, and A. Ryan. 
Eight Mineral Cartels: The New Challenge to Industrialized 
Nations. Met. Week, McGraw Hill, 1975, 177 pp. 

17. The Northern Miner. Nickel Stock Decline Spurs Price. V. 
70, No. 33, 1984, p. 13. 

18. Tin International. Forging Producer Bonds. V. 56, No. 4, 

1983, p. 120. 

19. Latin American Mining Letter. Tin Producers Call for 
Consumer Aid. V. 3, No. 19, 1984, p. 4. 

20. Tin News. Malaysia Tin Bureau. Tin Smuggling Strains 
Ties. V. 33, No. 4, 1984, p. 4. 

21. Malaysian Tin Bureau. Tin Stealing and 

Smuggling. V. 33, No. 5, 1984, p. 4. 
22. Tin International. Antismuggling Request. V. 57, No. 1, 

1984, p. 5. 

23. Plugging the Supply Gaps. V. 57, No. 8, 1984, 

p. 267. 

24. Tin Smuggling. V. 57, No. 2, 1984, p. 44. 

25. Antismuggling Moves. V. 56, No. 11, 1983, p. 

388. 

26. U.S. Bureau of Mines and U.S. Geological Survey. 
Principles of a Resource/Reserve Classification for Minerals. U.S. 
Geol. Surv. Circ. 831, 5 pp. 

27. Sainsbury, C. L. Tin Resources of the World. U.S. Geol. 
Surv. Bull. 1301, 1969, 55 pp. 

28. Sainsbury, C. L. and J. C. Hamilton. The Geology of Lode 
Tin Deposits. A Technical Conference on Tin. Meeting of the 
International Tin Council, London, England, 1967, ed. W. Fox. 
Int. Tin Council, London, 1967, v. 1, pp. 313-346. 



29. Sainsbury, C. L., and B. L. Reed. Tin. Ch. in United States 
Mineral Resources. U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Paper 820, 1973, pp. 
637-651. 

30. Gobber, D. J. and C. S. Hutchison. Geology of the Malay 
Peninsula (West Malaysia and Singapore). Wiley-Intersci., 1973, 
pp. 335-402. 

31. Nutalaya, P., K. V. Campbell, and A. S. McDonald. 
Aranyakanon, Payome, and Suthakorn, Phairat. Review of the 
Geology of Thai Tin Fields. Geol. Soc. of Malaysia, Bull. 11, 1979, 
pp. 137-159. 

32. Taylor, R. G. Geology of Tin Deposits. Developments in 
Economic Geology, No. 11. Elsevier, 1979, 543 pp. 

33. Tin International. Mining and Marketing. The Politics of 
the Possible. Mining in Japan. V. 57, No. 4, 1984, p. 115. 

34. Mining and Marketing. The Politics of the 

Possible. Mining in Argentina. V. 57, No. 4, 1984, p. 116. 

35. Anthoine, P., P. Evrard, C. Kharkevitch, and G. Schaar. 
The Symetain Tin Deposits: Geology and Mining. Pres. at Tech. 
Conf. on Tin, London, 1967, pp. 427-455; available from D. I. 
Bleiwas, BuMines, Denver, Co. 

36. Poss, J. R. The Legacies of Cornwall Mining Systems and 
Miners, World Min., 1979, v. 32, pp. 111-113. 

37. McAuslan, D. A., G. B. Dickie, P. K. Sarkar, P. E. Sinclair, 
and B. H. Wilson. The History of the Description of the East 
Kemptville Tin Deposits, Southwest Nova Scotia. Pres. at 82d 
Annual General Meeting of the Can. Inst, of Min. and Metall. 
Shell Resources Ltd., 1980, 11 pp. 

38. Tin International. Mining and Marketing. Giant Tin 
Project Takes Off. V. 57, No. 4, 1984, p. 44. 

39. Sainsbury, C. L. Association of Beryllium With Tin 
Deposits Rich in Fluorite. Econ. Geol., v. 59, No. 5, 1964, pp. 
920-926. 

40. Roskill Information Services Ltd. The Economics of Tin. 3d 
ed., London, 1981, 354 pp. 

41. Pakianathan, S., and P. Simpson. General Practices on 
Large Scale Hydraulic Mines in Malaysia. Pres. at Inst, of Min. 
and Metall., London, Nov. 16-19, 1964, 10 pp.; available from D. I. 
Bleiwas, BuMines, Denver, Co. 

42. Mining Journal. Malaysian Tin Output. V. 303, No. 7778, 
1984, p. 186. 

43. Tin Plant for Bolivia. V. 302, No. 7759, 1984, 

p. 302. 

44. Hassan, H. b. H. H. Malaysia as a Source of Tantalum. 
Pres. at 19th General Assembly of Tantalum Producers. Int. 
Study Centre, Ipoh, Malaysia, 1983, p. 22. 

45. International Mining. Thai Mining — Big Problems but 
Greater Potential. V. 1, No. 2, 1984, p. 34. 

46. Canadian Mining Journal. Additive, Refractory and 
Reactive Metals. V. 105, No. 2, 1984, p. 73. 

47. Dunne, W. T. Surface Production of Tin. Inst. Min. and 
Metall., Trans., Sect. A, 1976, v. 86, pp. A65-A66. 

48. Chuan, L. J., and Z. Zawawi. Retreatment of Table Tailings 
Using Gravity Concentrating Trays at Berjuntai Dredging 
Berhad, Malaysia. SEATRAD Centre, Ipoch, Malaysia, 1982, 9 
pp. 

49. Chadwick, J. R. Thai Offshore Dredging. World Min., 1982, 
v. 35, p. 42. 



48 



APPENDIX A.— DEPOSITS INVESTIGATED BUT NOT INCLUDED IN EVALUATION 



Country and deposit 



Reason(s) for exclusion 



Bolivia: 

Catavi Demonstrated resource exhausted. 

Enramada Tin is a minor byproduct. 

Brazil: Oriente Novo Demonstrated resource exhausted. 

Canada: 

Kidd Creek Tin is a minor byproduct. 

Sullivan Do. 

Portugal: Panasquiera Do. 

Spain: 

La Parilla Do. 

Santa Comba Do. 

United Kingdom: Hemerdon Do 

United States: 

Alaska: Cape Mountain, Ear Mountain, Tofty Tin Belt, Small resource, high cost, or inferred resource. 
Circle Hot Springs. 

Arizona: MINCO Lack of available data. 

Colorado: Climax molybdenum mine Tin is a minor byproduct. 



APPENDIX B.— WORLD TIN SMELTERS AND REFINERS 



The following table lists the location, capacity, grade 
of feed, and other pertinent data for 1982 smelters and 
refineries in MEC's. The largest plant capacity was in 
Malaysia, followed by Indonesia, Thailand, Bolivia, and 
Brazil. 

Members of the ITC recently cut tin sales significant- 
ly below capacity (by over 39 pet), while at the same time 
Brazil was expanding mine production. Brazil's smelter 
and refining capacity exceeds the availability of domestic 
concentrates, but Brazil does not accept foreign material. 
Some plants that relied totally on foreign concentrates to 
operate have either closed or reduced production as a 
result of reduced production among ITC members, poor 
market conditions, and the development of vertically 
intergrated industries among tin producing nations. The 



U.S. facility receives virtually all of its feed from Bolivia. 
Bolivia also ships concentrates to the United Kingdom 
and the Federal Republic of Germany. Bolivia formerly 
exported concentrates to Brazil, but owing to high import 
taxes, shipping has ceased. Burma exports concentrates, 
some of which are from illicit sources, primarily to 
Malaysia, the Netherlands, and Singapore. Singapore 
ships concentrates to the U.S.S.R., Spain and M ex i co - Up 
until 1979, Singapore also shipped to Brazil and the 
Republic of Korea, but the combination of the closure of 
the Korean plant, high taxes in Brazil, and marketing of 
tin from undisclosed sources have encouraged an expan- 
sion of Singapore's domestic smelting and refining 
capacity. 



Table B-1— Pertinent 1982 data for world primary tin smelters and/or refineries 



49 



Owner and/or operator 
and location 



Capacity, 

mt/yr metal Grade 1 



Feed 



Sources 2 



Pet Sn in 
products 



Processes used 3 



Byproducts 



MARKET ECONOMY COUNTRIES 



Argentina: Sociedad Minera Pirquitas 
Picchetti y Cia. S.A. (Buenos Aries). 

Australia: 
Associates Tin Smelters Pty Ltd. 
(Alexandria. NSW). 

Greenbushes Tin N.L. (Greenbushes, W. 

Australia). 

Total 

Belgium: Metallurgie Hoboken-Overpelt 

S.A. (Hoboken; closed 1980). 

Bolivia: Empresa Nacional de 
Fundiciones (ENAF) (Vintos Oruro). 



Funestano S.A. (Oruro) 
Total 



850 



Brazil: 
Cia. Estanifera do Brazil (CESBRA) (Volta 
Redonda Rondonia). 

Cia. Industrial Amazonense S.A. (CIA) 

(Manaus). 
Mamore Mineracao e Metalurgia (Sao 

Paulo). 
Best Metais e Soldas S.A. (Sao Paulo). 



Bera do Brasil, S.A. (Santo Amaro, Sao 

Paulo). 
Cia Industrial Fluminense S.A. (St. John 
del Rey). 

Total 

Germany, Federal Republic of: Berzelius 
Metallhutten GmbH (Duisburg). 



Indonesia: Peltim-lndonesia State Tin Corp. 
(Mentok, Bangka Is.). 

Japan: Mitsubishi Metal Corp. (Naoshima 
Kagawa). 

Korea, Republic of: Pyro Metal Industry Co. 

Ltd. (Seoul; closed 1981). 
Malaysia: 

Detuk Keramat Smelting Sdn. Bhd. 
(Georgetown, Penang). 

Straits Trading (MSC) (Butterworth, 
Penang). 
Total 

Mexico: 
Metales Potosi (San Luis Potosi). 



Estano Electro S.A. (Tlaepontl) 

Fundidora de Estano (San Luis Potosi). 



Total •. 

Netherlands: Billiton Metallurgie B.V. 
(Arnhem). 

Nigeria: Makeri Smelting Co. (Jos). 

Portugal: Neostano, Nova Empresa 
Estanifera do Mangualde S.A.R.L. 
(Mangualde). 

Rwanda: Societe Miniere du Rwanda 
(Somirwa) (Kigali). 

Singapore: 
Kimetal PTE LTD, (Jurong) 



Wattenmetals (Pte) Ltd. (Jurong) 



6,000 

800 

18,900 
8,000 

25,000 

3,000 
28,000 

10,000 

4,000 

12,000 

1,200 

500 

1,200 

28,900 
3,600 

38,000 
3,500 
1,200 

70,000 

60.000 
130,000 

2,500 



Total 



3,000 

6,000 
500 

6,500 



M Dom, imp 99.80 

M Dom 99.885 



H Cap 

NAp NAp 
H Imp 



M 



1,000 


M 


800 


M 


4,300 
2,500 


NAp 
M 


4,000 


H 


800 


M 



M-L Dom, solders 



M do 

NAp NAp 



Cap 

Dom, lmp(?) solders. 

Dom 

Dom 



Dom 
Dom 



NAp NAp 
M-L Imp 



M-L Imp 

M-L Imp, dom 

H do ... . 

H-M Dom, imp 

H Dom 

NAp NAp 



Imp 



. . do 
do 

NAp . 

Imp . 



Dom 
Imp 



99.80 

NAp 
99.966 



99 82 

99.5 
NAp 

99.982 

99.90 
99.953 

( 4 ) 

99.95 
7 99.95 

NAp 

O 

99.92 

99.99 



5 99.89 

99.89 
NAp 

99.89 

99.89 

99.50 

NAp 
99.935 

99.964 
99.90 



H-M Dom +99.80 



Imp +99.50 

do +99.50 



Reverberatory smelting 
furnace. 

Reverberatory smelting 
furnace, siro-smelt slag 
cleaning process. 

Electric smelting furnace. 



NAp 

Electric smelting furnace, 

concentrate and/or slag 

fuming. 
Electric smelting furnace, 

rotary smelting furnace, 

kivcet cyclone flash 

smelting process, vacuum 

distillation (refining). 
Reverberatory smelting 

furnace. 
NAp 



Reverberatory smelting 

furnace, electrolytic refining 

(acid electrolytes). 
Reverberatory smelting 

furnace. 
Reverberatory smelting 

furnace. 
Reverberatory smelting 

furnace, concentrate and/or 

slag fuming. 



NAp 

Reverberatory smelting 

furnace, concentrate and/or 

slag fuming. 
Rotary smelting furnace, 

reverberatory smelting 

furnace. 
Reverberatory smelting 

furnace, electrolytic refining 

(acid electrolytes). 
Reverberatory smelting 

furnace. 

Reverberatory smelting 
furnace, roast, electric 
smelting furnace. 

Reverberatory smelting 
furnace, roast. 

NAp 



Reverberatory smelting 
furnace, concentrate and/or 
slag fuming. 



None. 
Do. 

Ta 2 5 , slag. 

NAp. 

None. 

Pb, Bi. 

None. 
NAp. 

Pb, Bi 

Do. 
Do. 
Do 

Do. 

Do. 

NAp. 
NAp. 

Ta, Cb. 

None(?). 

None. 

Pb, Sb. 

Ta 2 5 slag. 
NAp. 

None(?). 



NAp NAp 



NAp 



Reverberatory smelting 


None. 


furnace. 




Reverberatory smelting 


Do. 


furnace. 




NAp . 


NAp. 

wo 3 (?). 


Reverberatory smelting 


furnace, concentrate and/or 




slag fuming, chemical. 




Reverberatory smelting 


Ta 2 5 slag 


furnace. 




Reverberatory smelting 


None. 


furnace, concentrate and/or 




slag fuming. 




Electronic smelting furnace, 


Ta 2 5 slag 


concentrate and/or slag 




fuming. 




Rotary smelting furnace, 


Do. 


electric smelting furnace. 




Reverbertory smelting 


Do. 


furnace, electric smelting 




furnace, kettles. 




NAp 


NAp. 



NAp Not applicable. (?) Indicates uncertain information. 

' H— High-grade concentrates (>50 pet Sn), M— Medium-grade concentrates (25-50 pet Sn), L— Low-grade concentrates (25 pet Sn). 

2 Dom — Domestic sources of concentrates, Imp* — Imported concentrates, Cap — Captive sources — own mines and concentrates. 

3 Processes used for production of refined tin metal. 

4 Tin alloys and solders only. 
= Alloys also produced. \ <J jt j i'V \i '"'"> 



6 Alloys only 

7 Alloys and solders also produced 



50 



Table B-1. — Pertinent 1982 data for world primary tin smelters and/or refineries — Continued 



Owner and/or operator 
and location 



Capacity, 

mt/yr metal Grade 1 



Feed 



Sources 2 



Pet Sn in 
products 



Processes used 3 



Byproducts 



MARKET ECONOMY COUNTRIES— Continued 



South Africa, Republic of: 
Rooiberg Tin Ltd (Rooiberg) 



South African Iron & Steel Industrial Corp. 

Ltd. (Vanderbijpart). 
Zoaiplaats Tin Mining Co. Ltd. 

(Potgietarsfus). 

Total 

Spain: 
Metalurgica del Noroeste S.A. (MENSA) 
(Villgarcia de Arosa). 

Minero Metalurgica Estano S.A. (Madrid). 
Ferroaleaciones Espanolas S.A. (Medina 

del Campo). 
Electrometalurgica del Agueda S.A. 

(Villaralbo). 
Total 

Thailand: 
Thailand Smelting & Refining Co., Ltd. 
(Thaisarco) (Phuket). 

Thai Pioneer Co. (Phathum Thani, 

Bangkok). 
Thailand Tantalum Industries Corp. (Thai 

Present Smelter Co.) (Phuket). 
Sutin Seja Wongse (Bangkok) 



Liang Ngiab Co. Ltd. (Bangkok). 

Total 

United Kingdom: Capper Pass & Son Ltd. 
(RTZ subsidiary) (North Ferriby, Hull). 



U.S.A.: Gulf Chemical & Metallurgical Corp. 
(Texas City, TX). 



Zaire: Zairetain (Manono) 



Zimbabwe: Kamativi Smelting & Refining 

Co. (Bulawayo). 

Total for market economy countries. 
China: 

Yunnan Tin Corp. (Gejiu, Kokiu Yunnan). 



Linchow Smelter (Liuchow, Guangxi). 
Kwangchow Smelter (Guangdong 
Province). 

Ping Gui Smelter (Ping Gui, Guangxi). 
Limo Smelter (Guangxi Province). 

Kanchow Smelter (Guangxi Province). 

Hungyang Smelter (Hengyang Hunan). 
German Democratic 

Republic: Huttenkombinat, Albert Funk 

(Freibert). 
USSR.: state tin enterprises (Novosibirsk, 

Ryozan, and Podolsk). 



Total for centrally planned economy 
countries. 
Grand total, all countries. 



2,000 

2,000 
2,000 

6,000 

4,500 



1,000 
800 

1,000 

7,300 



35,000 

3,500 

10,000 

600 

300 

49,400 
18,000 



8,000 

1,200 

1,200 

308,500 

10,000 



2,000 
1,000 



1,000 
400 

100 

100 
1 ,500- 
2,200 

47,000 



110,500 



419,000 



M-L 



M-L 
M 



H 



H 



H 



Cap, dom 

Imp, dom 
Cap 



NAp NAp 



99.95 Electric smelting furnace, 

electrolytic refining (acid 
electrolytes). 

5 99.9 Electric smelting furnace. 

99.95 Electric smelting furnace, 
concentrate and/or slag 
fuming. 
NAp NAp 



Imp +99.90 



Imp +99.90 

Imp ( 6 ) 



M Imp 

NAp NAp 



Dom, cap 



H Dom 

H Dom, slags 
H Dom 



Dom 



NAp NAp 

M-L Dom, imp, complexes, 
residues 



M-L Imp 



Cap +99.50 



H Cap 

NAp NAp 

M Dom 



Dom 
Dom 



Dom 
Dom 

Dom 



Dom 

Dom, imp 



Dom, imp. and slag 
residues. 



NAp NAp 
NAp NAp 



Reverberatory smelting 
furnace, concentrate and/or 
slag fuming. 

NAp 

Electric smelting furnace, 
concentrate and/or fuming. 
( 6 ) Concentrate and/or slag 

fuming. 
NAp NAp 



99.925 Reverberatory smelting 

furnace, electric smelting 
furnace. 

99.920 Electric smelting furnace, Ta 
recovery equipment. 

99.920 Electric smelting furnace. 

99.90 Reverberatory smelting 

furnace. 
99.90 do 

NAp NAp 

99.80 Reverberatory smelting 

furnace, electric smelting 
furnace. 
99.999 Concentrate and/or slag 

fuming. 
99.80 Kaldo furnace (high-grade 
slags and residue), 
electrolytic refining (acid 
electrolytes), chloride 
volatilization. 
Reverberatory smelting 
furnace, concentrate and/or 
slag fuming. 
+ 99.50 Electric smelting furnace, 
rotary smelting furnace. 
NAp NAp 

99.75 Reverberatory smelting 

furnace, concentrate and/or 
slag fuming. 

7 99.95 Do 

7 99.92 Electric smelting furnace, 

concentrate and/or slag 
fuming. 

7 99.98 Do 

( 4 ) Reverberatory smelting 

furnace, roast, Ta 2 5 . 
( 4 ) Reverberatory smelting 

furnace, Ta 2 5 . 

( 4 ) Do 

99.00 Reverberatory smelting 

furnace, concentrate and/or 
slag fuming. 
9.915 Electric smelting furnace, 
concentrate and or slag 
fuming, vacuum distallation, 
electrolytic refining. 
NAp NAp 

NAp NAp 



None(?). 

None. 
Do. 

NAp. 

NAp. 

NAp. 
NAp. 

NAp. 

NAp. 

Ta 2 5 slags. 

Do. 
Ta products. 
Ta 2 5 slags. 

Do. 

NAp. 

Pb, Cu, Ag, Bi. 

Au, others. 



Ta 2 5 
slags(?). 

Do. 

NAp. 

As 2 3 , Pb, Sb, 
•Cu. 

Do. 
Do. 



Not known. 
W0 3 , Co 2 5 . 

None(?). 

None(?). 
None. 



Not known. 

NAp. 
NAp. 



NAp Not applicable. (?) Indicates uncertain information. 

1 H — High-grade concentrates (>50 pet Sn), M — Medium-grade concentrates (25-50 pet Sn), L — Low-grade concentrates (25 pet Sn) 

2 Dom — Domestic sources of concentrates, Imp — Imported concentrates, Cap — Captive sources — own mines and concentrates. 

3 Processes used for production of refined tin metal. 

4 Tin alloys and solders only. 

5 Alloys also produced. 

6 Alloys only. 

7 Alloys and solders also produced. 



* U.S.G.P.O.: 1986- 162-278/50649 



s 




<J> * 8 H ' ^ 



^ '*^0* AP 



V 



v » * • °» ^ ,0 s * * • '^ O- v. 

^ «..- ,G V \3 **^T* /V ^ 



>* v \ 















^ %^To- A V 



V<0 



***** 








:- -w • 




• o 



^oV 1 



^ 



V v v j v^* % X \'^ f, V v^*V* V^ f v 

q. *' . . s* A 



^ *». 





*q ♦/7V»» A 




*>' ... "<6 ^ .„.._ w *u •*- s ".*>' .l.,%, "" ".n^..-. .- * 







*^ o. 



'o? 
















o > 














H q 



-^^ 



J ^^- 

M 




/ ^v -33K* ^ ^ WW 4 / ^ '-^^* ^ ^ 




q# *'Ti s * a v 





<*. '0-.7* ,o v ^q, *r?x 









'bV 







.* '^o< -^iBr. -ov^ 




^°^ 



*bV" 




q^ * 

o. ' » , n 




^ v .. 



,& v *h */T7T* A q, 'o .1 



"oV" 




* <n* . . ^ * o "° ^ -*• *" 1 ^ .. q. *°^»* / %• *'^* ^ .. q. *»-° 9 ^v 



r ^0 

^ 1 




.,,. a,o ^ *.«•' ^ q^ *.m« a -q. ♦«■«<>' ^ 




• A\§^5,° \p<p' o ^5^^ r W *^^^ 

<. *o . » • ,G^ ^q. 



v -yu 






-^ 















±> -*■ 








O > 











Ay ^f> * „ o 3 ■ «F o 



' ,0 

















•» o 











*" » 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



002 955 923 5 



